Home

Previous Entry | Next Entry

More Subscription Drive Thoughts

  • Aug. 18th, 2007 at 2:19 PM

So it seems a fair # of people have taken the need for this drive to heart.  Cool.  I hope you all find magazines you'll enjoy for years to come.  But as is inevitable, I've noticed a # of offshoot conversations/ideas branching out from my original post.  Nothing wrong with that, but I do want to address some of them:

1) "Short fiction isn't dying.  I've been listening to that for years and it hasn't gone anywhere.  That's not about to change."

It's called a slow death.  Back during the golden age age of the pulps, Weird Tales' circulation never topped 50,000.  Considering that the most successful pulps topped 1,000,000 back in the 20's, 50,000 wasn't exactly an overwhelming number.  Today any of the speculative magazines would be thrilled to have a circulation of 50,000.  People keep hearing about the death of short fiction because the numbers keep dropping.  They won't drop forever.  Eventually there will come a time when the magazines will cease.  Will new ones start?  Probably.  They always seem to.  But very few of them last.  If anyone has solid statistics I'd love to know about them, but once you move beyond small press, how magazines last beyond five years?  Very few.  And there is nothing wrong with small press.  I have friends that run small press magazines, and there are a # of small press magazines I highly respect.  But short fiction should be more than just about small press.  Small press implies that it will only reach so many people.  People have also cited anthologies.  Sure, these will be around too, but no one seems to talk about how anthologies used to be a lot more common as well.  As to online fiction, again, I'm all for it.  And while it is everywhere, how much of it lasts?  How much of it is any good?  How many of them are making $$$?  The answer is very few indeed.  Support the ones that can make a difference.

2) "Besides subscriptions, I think people should also consider making donations to places like Strange Horizons and Ideomancer.  We should also support those places that depend on our donations."

I couldn't agree more.  Check out places like these.  If you enjoy the fiction, drop a little something in the cookie jar.  Wish I thought to mention this in my original post. 

3) "I can go to a great venue like Subterranean and get my fiction for free."

Nothing wrong with that.  It's great that Subterranean is putting out a quality product.  I hope they do it for a long time.  But remember they're using the short fiction to promote their company.  I'm not saying they're going to cancel their short fiction or have plans to cancel it (must beware of the rumor monsters), but just remember that none of us expected Scifiction to have its plug pulled either (except my defunct critique group, who'd discussed this possibility in passing the night before it happened).  If you want to make sure a short fiction venue you enjoy sticks around, you may want to consider subscribing or donating somewhere.       

4) "The editors are picking stories that cater to writers.   The writers are writing stories that cater to other writers."

Do some stories published in some of the magazines appeal more to writers than readers?  It's a fair argument.  But really, just about all of us editors pick stories we like (a lot, quality permitting).  Other than posting our guidelines, editors have no control over what stories the writers send us.   Do some of them writer stories that other writers appreciate more than readers?  Undoubtedly.  But I imagine most writers will tell you they're simply trying to write the best possible story as they know how.  Also, I'm growing rather tired of the argument  that editors need to stop picking what they like and start catering to what the reader likes.  Um, hello?   So what is it we're supposed to do?  Pick stories we don't like?  Trust me when I tell you that if a short fiction editor started going against his/her tastes the magazine would put out an inferior product.

And for the record, the only thing I want when I read a story is to be engaged.  How you engage me can happen any number of ways.  Look at my profile page.  I like all sorts of fantasy stories.  I have never and will never pick a story that I feel caters to writers.  I will pick what is in my estimation the best of the best from the submissions pile.   If it happens to be what some would term a "writerly  story" that can't be helped.  But for me, the most important thing is an enjoyable story.  If you read Realms of Fantasy, I'd be rather curious to know (as would the writers of these stories, I think) which of the stories I've fished out are catering to other writers.

5) "Only other writers are reading these magazines."

An emphatic "No, wrong!" is necessary.  I can't count the number of cover letters I've read that incorporate this line: "I've been a long-time reader of Realms of Fantasy, and now I'm finally trying my hand at writing."   Most of these people remain readers, because the majority of them will only submit a few more stories at most, and poorly written at that.  There is a big difference between a writer and someone who tries his hand at writing.  The Ted Chiangs of the world, i.e. someone who writes very little but always produces something that is both published and well received, are a rare breed.  Most people who write little don't get published, give up after a few rejections, and go back to being strictly readers.  And lots of people will remain long-time readers without even dabbling in writing.  It's a little egocentric to assume that only other writers would subscribe to these magazines.  Not everyone who enjoys speculative fiction makes it their passion.

6) "You can't expect to save the magazines by only having writers subscribe to them."

I don't.  See point # 5.  I think more writers should subscribe, sure, but I've been saying all along that I'd like more speculative fans to subscribe as well.  A lot of them have never tried short speculative fiction.  A % of them will enjoy it if they give it a chance.

7) Some people have made this just about the print magazines.  It's about short fiction in general, and I've said as much from the beginning.

8) "I've tried a few magazines.  They're all the same.  I never enjoy them."

You've tried a few magazines, huh?  And how many novels by different author have you tried?  The editors to short story magazines make their presence felt to readers a lot more than the editors to novels (this is not to say they're more important).  When you try a magazine, you're not only trying the authors that happen to be in that issue, you're trying the editor.  If you've tried 10 different magazines ( a rough #) with different editors and haven't enjoyed any of them, I think it's fair to say short fiction isn't for you.  If you've tried 3  or so different magazines and have come to this conclusion, try another.           

9) "I can just get a Year's Best anthology."

These anthologies provide a wonderful service, but if the short fiction markets dry up it stands to reason these wonderful editors will be hard-pressed to find as many wonderful stories each year.  If anyone can continue to put out such quality I'm sure it's them.  Still, it's something to think about.

10) I don't have a # 10, but 9 is plenty enough!

Comments

[info]nancyfulda wrote:
Aug. 18th, 2007 09:44 pm (UTC)
>Um, hello? So what is it we're supposed to do? Pick stories we
>don't like?

Aw, c'mon. Haven't you ever read a story that didn't exactly thrill you and think, "I bet Shawna will love this"?

At BU we buy what we like, as does every other magazine I'm aware of. But that doesn't mean it's impossible for an editor to be so familiar with the target audience that he'll override personal tastes in order to please them.

I'm not personally into Bob the Builder toys, but I can sure-shootin' tell you which ones my son will be thrilled to get for Christmas. Same principle.
[info]nancyfulda wrote:
Aug. 18th, 2007 09:45 pm (UTC)
By the way, I agree with all your other points. ;)
[info]douglascohen wrote:
Aug. 18th, 2007 10:12 pm (UTC)
Well I'm glad you agree with my other points. As to the one in question, sure, Shawna has bought stories I don't like. I'm sure I've recommended stories she hasn't liked. And yes, I've passed along stories I would have passed on if I were the editor. But with these stories I recognized the author was doing something worthwhile, and thought Shawna should indeed have a look at them, because she might feel more strongly about them. When I'm reading slush it's not my job to decide what's publishable, but rather what might be publishable. It's a fine line, but it's there. And I've mostly stopped guessing what Shawna will love. Every time I think I have her tastes pegged, she surprises me. :)

And I'm sure there are big fans of the magazine that have read stories they didn't appreciate. No editor can deliver stories that everyone in their reading audience will appreciate every time. As for personal tastes, well, if Realms of Fantasy publishes all sorts of original fantasy (which we do), then if it's fantasy and Shawna likes it enough, I say publish it. Once we start saying, "No, I don't think our readers will appreciate this sort of fantasy even though I/we like it," we're really not Realms of Fantasy anymore. We're Some Realms of Fantasy.

And I'm afraid your Bob the Builder analogy doesn't work for me. :(
[info]nancyfulda wrote:
Aug. 18th, 2007 10:32 pm (UTC)
>>And I'm afraid your Bob the Builder analogy doesn't work for me. :(

Oh. Maybe I should have made it a Hot Wheels analogy instead?
[info]douglascohen wrote:
Aug. 18th, 2007 10:42 pm (UTC)
Heh. Looking past the fact that Bob the Builder is a completely different market, you're dealing with an audience of one that you have constant access to ...
[info]nancyfulda wrote:
Aug. 19th, 2007 09:24 am (UTC)
Yeah, that's a good point.

So if I'm understanding you, what you're saying is that while it's not a bad concept to buy with the target audience in mind, predicting the target audience is so difficult that the best possible approximation is to just buy what you like?
[info]bluetyson wrote:
Aug. 19th, 2007 09:42 am (UTC)
You would think a business could be a little bit more analytical than that, surely?
[info]douglascohen wrote:
Aug. 19th, 2007 05:51 pm (UTC)
Bluetyson, see my reply to Nancy.
[info]douglascohen wrote:
Aug. 19th, 2007 05:50 pm (UTC)
It boils down to what each magazine is trying to accomplish with its fiction. F&SF, Baen's Universe, and Realms of Fantasy are all trying to accomplish different things, hence they need different kinds of editors.

F&SF is a digest running fantasy & science fiction, with a long tradition of offering a literary sensibility. Gordon (and John) are upholding that tradition. But literary stories don't appeal to every editor. Someone else in these jobs could be more hard-pressed to pick out the best material of this sort. When this tradition goes back decades, if Gordon were to start publishing shoot 'em space operas he'd likely upset his core audience. Would he consider a shoot 'em space opera? Sure. But give him a reason to based on what his magazine publishes, so his readers aren't left scratching their heads.

Now look at Baen's Universe. They also run f&sf, but through an online venue with color illustrations, and by the editor's own confession (Eric Flynt, since Mike Resnick is also part of the team now), they're after readers' "beer money." Obviously they're taking a different approach, which calls for an editor more receptive to a shoot 'em up space opera (among other types of stories). They're targeting a different reader (though crossover exists between readers of F&SF and Baen's).

Finally you have Realms of Fantasy. We run fantasy, through a full-sized print magazine with color illustrations. But we are as open to a piece of subtle magic realism as we are to primal s&s. Follow in the footsteps of Kelly Link or Robert E. Howard. So long as you're not imitating them, either is cool (minus Howard's racist and misogynistic tendencies). Our magazine's appeal--along with pretty pictures and non-fiction--is offering every sort of original fiction that falls under the realm of fantasy.

All three venues are buying with their target audience in mind. There's room for all three audiences. It's less about picking different stories and more about finding new ways to get these stories into the hands of fresh readers.

Now let me ask you a question. When you're reading slush, are you thinking about reader demand or the magazine's vision? Are the readers picking your stories or are you picking stories for your readers?

However you answer, it's obviously a symbiotic relationship. But at the end of the day I think short story editors must trust themselves that by picking stories true to the vision of the magazine, they are catering to the demands of their audience.

Reader input is fine, and while I don't think it's something to be ignored (far from it!) I'm not fond of the idea of pandering, or whatever one wishes to call it. There's only so much good short fiction to go around; running stories based on reader demand can lead to a dip in quality.

With Baen's Universe, it's a different situation. Not only do you offer fast response times and email submissions, two things writers love, but you're also paying $.06-$.25 a word. With no word limits! Writers--pro and otherwise--are coming out of the woodworks for you guys, so much that you have tiers of people reading slush, with several people handling the initial wave. Although your rates for new writers are comparable to other big magazines, a lot of new writers see $.25 and send their stories to you guys first, even though there's no way you're paying this rate to a newbie. Factor all these things together and it's no surprise Baen's Universe finds the best kinds of "beer money stories." That's not intended as a slight. I admire what you guys are doing, and wish other speculative book publishers would launch magazines of their own (whether Baen's and ROF want this is another discussion ...)

I'm willing to bet you guys get more submissions each month than any other magazine out there (certainly RoF), even F&SF. May I ask how many subs you're getting? I ask because in terms of what Baen's is looking for, you have the pick of the litter. Given their submission rate I think F&SF does too, but I'll admit the target audience here is somewhat smaller than "beer money stories."
[info]nancyfulda wrote:
Aug. 20th, 2007 11:06 am (UTC)
>Now let me ask you a question. When you're reading slush, are you
>thinking about reader demand or the magazine's vision?

Both, of course. I've rejected stories I adored because it's just not the sort of thing we publish. I've also passed stories up to Mike and Eric that weren't really my style, but that I could tell were well-written.

(Fortunately, we have a wide enough spread of slush readers that this really isn't guesswork. If a story's good, somebody on our slush crew will love it. It's truly enlightening to see how widely tastes vary, even within a small focused group working toward the same goal.)

> But at the end of the day I think short story editors must trust
> themselves that by picking stories true to the vision of the
> magazine, they are catering to the demands of their audience.

Agreed. My original point--which I may not have conveyed very clearly--was that "true to the vision of the magazine" is not necessarily the same thing as "stories I like". There is, however, usually a lot of overlap.

> May I ask how many subs you're getting?

It's somewhere around ten per day. We've had 65 subs come in since last Wednesday, and that's a fairly typical week.

I'm not sure whether we're really getting first crack at the best stories yet (although of course we'd like to). The Big Four have been around a lot longer than we have, and a lot of authors have a strong preference for printed-on-paper, hold-it-in-your-hand magazines.
[info]douglascohen wrote:
Aug. 20th, 2007 07:48 pm (UTC)
>Both, of course. I've rejected stories I adored because it's just not the >sort of thing we publish. I've also passed stories up to Mike and Eric that >weren't really my style, but that I could tell were well-written.

And that's one of the big ways our venues differ, I think. I'll reject something if it happens to be sf, pyschological horror, or something else that strikes me as fantasy. But everything within the realms of fantasy (ORIGINAL fantasy) is fair game for consideration. Shawna and I certainly have our preferences (who doesn't?), but for me I can love a story OR I can just think it's well-written (enough) without connecting with it that it should be passed along to Shawna.

>Agreed. My original point--which I may not have conveyed very clearly--was >that "true to the vision of the magazine" is not necessarily the same thing >as "stories I like". There is, however, usually a lot of overlap.

Agreed.

>It's somewhere around ten per day. We've had 65 subs come in since last >Wednesday, and that's a fairly typical week.

>I'm not sure whether we're really getting first crack at the best stories >yet (although of course we'd like to). The Big Four have been around a lot >longer than we have, and a lot of authors have a strong preference for >printed-on-paper, hold-it-in-your-hand magazines.

Well 10/day is already more than ROF. I guess you're not getting as many as F&SF yet, but I'm willing to bet the numbers are increasing. And I think some of these authors like the $$$ more! :)

[info]nancyfulda wrote:
Aug. 21st, 2007 09:54 am (UTC)
Well, of course, $$$ is always helpful. :)
[info]mmarques wrote:
Aug. 19th, 2007 03:19 am (UTC)
Today I went out and bought the current issues of OnSpec and Realms of Fantasy.
[info]douglascohen wrote:
Aug. 19th, 2007 04:12 am (UTC)
Woo hoo!
[info]em_sky wrote:
Aug. 19th, 2007 03:48 am (UTC)
Thanks for starting this. I signed up for and reported three annual subscriptions this weekend.

Your posts have been a wonderful inspiration for me as a writer to approach the short fiction genre as more than just an artistic outlet. It is also a tremendous marketing tool.

http://www.mindunbound.com/blog/2007/08/more_on_short_stories.html



[info]douglascohen wrote:
Aug. 19th, 2007 04:17 am (UTC)
Glad to hear it!
[info]ruralwriter wrote:
Aug. 24th, 2007 12:07 am (UTC)
I think this is an interesting initiative and discussion you've started.

I think it's hard for readers to find out what speculative fiction magazines are out there. Certainly, it's not possible to go to physical bookstores to see the full range of speculative fiction magazines. At one time, Project Pulp and Clarkesworld provided an online service for readers to both know what magazines were available and also to purchase them. Is there anything other one-stop-shop out there like that anymore?

If not, it's a shame there's no place to see a listing of the variety of speculative fiction magazines that exist. The closest would probably be ralan.com, which is a writer-oriented site, rather than a reader-oriented site.

I'm intrigued with a couple options delivering non-magazine based short fiction right now. First, there are the audio fiction "pods" (EscapePod, PseudoPod, and CastlePod, speaking of donor-supported efforts). These seem ideal for individuals looking for speculative fiction while commuting, or for individuals with disability, and so forth. At one time, I think F&SF apparently experimented with some audio fiction, as they have some years-past stories available through audible.com. I suppose F&SF didn't find that to be a successful venture, as they didn't continue it, perhaps.

Second, Jeff Crook's experimenting with postcard-delivered fiction, combined with art, in Postcards from Hell. Delivering flash fiction once a week is a killer idea that I wish I'd thought of. I wonder how that's progressing? Maybe it's been tried before, but it's an effort that's new to me.
[info]douglascohen wrote:
Aug. 24th, 2007 01:02 am (UTC)
Glad you're enjoying the discussions. If there is a store like Clarkesworld, I don't know about it (not quite the same, but there's fictionwise.com). This sort of initiative is very much an uphill climb, so every person who joins the bandwagon is more than welcome.

Profile

[info]douglascohen
Douglas Cohen

Advertisement

Latest Month

July 2009
S M T W T F S
   1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728293031 
Powered by LiveJournal.com
Designed by
HP.com/gwen