PING Joe Konrath, Bob Sloan, and Quadpus
Miki Kocic
science fiction or fantasy.
I mean the story contained in this message. I decided to follow Joe's
example and put on my salesman hat and write a story intended to sell.
It's not as good as something like "Return to Earth," but IMO far more
likely to catch the eye of an editor. Turns out writing commercial
fiction isn't against my principles after all--although, like the gay
man who married and fathered two children, I merely "proved I could do it."
So I entreat you to read the following and comment as you see fit. I'll
post the story for general comment once I've heard from you.
In Memoriam
by Miki Kocic
Copyright 2004 by Miki Kocic
--------------------------------------------------------
"Now, here's my plan," said Batty.
Hicks glared at him. Hojo just grunted, head down. It wasn't funny.
They sat naked and barehanded in a fifteen-foot pit with vertical sides,
topped by a five-hundred-pound lid. Above them was the bottom of the ocean.
"Seriously, guys," said Batty. "We dig down."
Hicks studied him like a lab rat. Hojo fingered a large pebble at his
hip, but didn't look up.
"And we do what, dig all the way through the centre of the earth to
Idaho?" said Hicks.
"Nope." Batty stood up so his skinny, uncircumcised knob was in Hicks'
crosshairs. Hicks looked away.
"There are bound to be caves and tunnels below us," Batty continued, his
hands fluttering at his sides, as if to draw attention to his dick.
"There are always caves and tunnels under the ground. We dig until we
find one, then we follow it to shore."
Hojo wrapped his hand around the pebble.
Hicks laughed. "There are so many things wrong with your idea I don't
know where to start. Digging will cause a cave-in. We could dig for
days before we found something. The jerks who put us here would have
thought of that. We--"
"Keep going until we run out of air," Batty interrupted, his voice
barely above a husky whisper.
Hicks rubbed his forehead. "How do we dig, with our bare hands?"
"That's where my plan comes in." Batty sat down beside Hojo. "We--"
Like a rattlesnake, Hojo's arm sprang up and brained Batty with the
pebble. Batty collapsed, his arms and legs twitching. Hicks gawped,
then fell to his hands and knees over Batty. Hojo shoved Hicks aside
and smashed the rock on Batty's face. Batty went still.
Hicks crabcrawled to the far end of the pit and sat with his knees drawn
up, staring wide-eyed at Hojo. Even after Hojo dropped the pebble, it
took Hicks minutes to find his voice.
"Why did you do that?" Hicks whispered.
"Because of his plan."
Hicks frowned. "What, you were afraid it wouldn't work?"
"I was afraid it *would* work."
"You don't want to get out of here?"
"No." Hojo looked up for the first time. "I've made my peace with God.
I'm ready to die. But survival instinct would have made me betray my
word to my Maker."
Hicks nodded as if he understood. "But you don't mind if I try it, do
you? You can stay here if--"
Hojo sprang up like a mongoose and slammed into Hicks. Hicks lost his
breath and was stunned. When he recovered his senses, Hojo's bulk was
on top of him, and Hojo's hands were wrapped around his neck. Hicks saw
black spots before he realized his legs were still bent. He kicked with
all his might, and Hojo staggered back two steps.
Still almost unconscious, gasping and wheezing, Hicks scrambled across
the pit. Hojo pounced on him just as his hands reached Batty's ankles.
Hojo knelt on Hicks' back, pressed one hand against the nape of his
neck, and pulled on his forehead. Hicks jerked his arms back. Batty's
body arced over him, and Batty's penis went in Hojo's mouth.
Hojo sprang off and staggered away, gurgling and moaning. Hicks lay
flat, sucking wind and watching Hojo collapse to his knees. When he
felt able, Hicks stood up, hefted the biggest rock he could lift, and
held it with both hands above Hojo's head.
"You can still stay here if you leave me alone," said Hicks.
Hojo shook his bent head. "We go to hell together."
Hicks brained him. Hojo grunted. Hicks hit him again, and he
collapsed. Hicks dropped to his knees and pounded Hojo's head a few
more times until he'd lost count.
After he'd flung Batty's body and hauled Hojo's to the edge of the pit,
Hicks found a sharp rock and knelt in the centre of the floor.
He pointed at Batty, said "In your memory," and began to scrape the
earthen floor.
Joel Crum
$sO4....@news20.bellglobal.com:
> In Memoriam
I am perplexed as to why you would consider this the more publishable of
the two stories.
<Warning!>
<The following is all very blunt and offers no advice on how to improve
the stories. I focus on flaws as readers will perceive them.>
Readers of this story will be confused by the untold back story of this
piece. How did the men get into a whole under the ocean? Where they
would not be by Return to Earth.
They will be confused by the setting. How was a whole constructed under
the ocean, capped, then emptied of water? How did it remain filled with
air while the men were placed in it? The setting in "Return to Earth" is
again better - it is our own world with an anthropomorphized stand of
grove. Anthropomorphized trees have hundreds of not thousands of years of
historical tradition to back them up.
Plot is often considered to be more importance in published work. Again
"In Memoriam" seems the weaker of the two stories. Its plot is entirely
driven by the weakly characterized personality of the man who becomes
psychotic. Alternately the characters in "Return to Earth" drive the
plot by following their own logical desires the grove for food, then to
act out in its annoyance. The cop works at his job, and then acts in
gratitude which unexpectedly costs him his place in society.
Also the pace of the plot should be considered. "In Memoriam's" pacing
is odd with regard to mass-market fiction because the first murder is
delivered too rapidly to be part of the climax yet to slowly to an
opening attention getting device. I will grant that "Return to Earth"
has a non-traditional sort of action (to wit: the 'hero' loses) it's much
more neatly arched. It's opening murder happens early enough to be
attention getting, the action rises neatly though the body being
discovered and the solution of the murder, the capture of the murder
happens out of the POV so it doesn't up the cops relationship with the
grove, and the eventual climax (the fight) and falling action the cop and
grove's death.
There are some publishing only concerns.
Both pieces are short for publishing. However, I believe you are better
with 1600 words then with 600.
The political climate will be an aid to "Return to Earth" as it has
fairly conservationist themes and there is a significant market for that
right now. "In Memoriam" is reasonably a-political which won't hurt it.
Both stand to offend the religiously minded, but I would say "Return to
Earth" less so as it makes no claim to knowledge of what goes on after
death whereas "In Memoriam" has someone becoming a killer because he's
found "piece with god."
"In Memoriam" is (presumably) a horror piece. "Return to Earth" is
fantasy-fic. I believe the markets are fairly equal in size.
In conclusion, if I were attempting to sell one - as a stone hearted
businessmen - I would go with "Return to Earth."
--
- Joel C.
"Broke-brained as he was, he knew that taking a train ride with a giant
in a pitch-dark boxcar was not the solution to any reasonable problem." -
"Over Yonder," by Lucius Shepard
Ejucaided Redneck
> I mean the story contained in this message. I decided to follow Joe's
> example and put on my salesman hat and write a story intended to sell.
To whom?
--
Uncle Iv Surveys His Domain From His Rocker of a Sunday
Afternoon As Aunt Dory Starts to Chop Kindling
Mister Williams
lets youn me move
tother side the house
the woman
choppin woods
mite nigh the awkerdist thing
I seen
-- Jonathan Williams, from AN EAR IN BARTRAM'S TREE, c. 1962
--
"Bearskin to Holly Fork: Stories From Appalachia"
is now available from Amazon, Barnes and Noble,
or your favorite local bookstore.
Fiction, poetry, essays
New MP3: "Second Cousin"
http://www.bobsloansampler.com/
Radio Interview: http://tinyurl.com/2zjd4
Television Interview: http://www.athensvps.com/fun/fun.html
Miki Kocic
Wow, you sound really pissed off. I know there's no benefit to arguing
with a critic, so here are just the thoughts I had while writing this story:
Joel Crum wrote:
> Readers of this story will be confused by the untold back story of this
> piece. How did the men get into a whole under the ocean?
Initially, readers will accept that the three guys *are* in that hole,
because such acceptance is a basic part of reading fiction. The
predicament that the three find themselves in is sort of like a
cliffhanger ending--it's so extreme that it makes the reader eager to
find out how they'll get out of it. When the reader never finds out,
he's frustrated; but by then, there have been so many twists and so much
emotional stimulation that the specific nature of the frustration is
obscured and becomes a generalized increase in agitation.
It seems you didn't react that way, but you're a critical reader,
whereas most readers are looking for entertainment. This story
unabashedly entertains by tittilating, just as it was meant to do.
> They will be confused by the setting. How was a whole constructed under
> the ocean, capped, then emptied of water? How did it remain filled with
> air while the men were placed in it? The setting in "Return to Earth" is
> again better - it is our own world with an anthropomorphized stand of
> grove. Anthropomorphized trees have hundreds of not thousands of years of
> historical tradition to back them up.
Those things form no part of the story other than background. I believe
most casual readers would gloss over them, or at most be frustrated at
the end, re. which see above. This story contains no mystical elements,
while "Return to Earth" is highly mystical. Some people, such as Bob
S., refuse to read such stories because they view them as fantasy.
> Plot is often considered to be more importance in published work. Again
> "In Memoriam" seems the weaker of the two stories. Its plot is entirely
> driven by the weakly characterized personality of the man who becomes
> psychotic.
Batty, a highly ingenious fellow, comes up with a way to escape a
daunting predicament. Hicks, a skeptic, is won over and later dedicates
his efforts to Batty's memory. He also overcomes huge physical odds in
order to survive, and is forced to kill, reluctantly, in order to keep
surviving. Hojo comes up with an astonishingly twisted idea: When
you've said your final prayers, you make sure death happens, just so you
don't double-cross God. I intended to put a lot of good
characterization in there.
> Also the pace of the plot should be considered. "In Memoriam's" pacing
> is odd with regard to mass-market fiction because the first murder is
> delivered too rapidly to be part of the climax yet to slowly to an
> opening attention getting device.
I see it as a spike in the story - a burst of adrenaline that
tittilation-minded readers would enjoy. Admittedly, the story is
awfully short to have more than one spike, but I deliberately crammed a
lot of action into a short space.
> Both pieces are short for publishing. However, I believe you are better
> with 1600 words then with 600.
Six hundred words qualifies as flash in some markets, which opens up a
whole bunch of places "Return to Earth" would be too long for.
> The political climate will be an aid to "Return to Earth" as it has
> fairly conservationist themes and there is a significant market for that
> right now. "In Memoriam" is reasonably a-political which won't hurt it.
> Both stand to offend the religiously minded, but I would say "Return to
> Earth" less so as it makes no claim to knowledge of what goes on after
> death whereas "In Memoriam" has someone becoming a killer because he's
> found "piece with god."
I didn't mean Hojo's statement to be taken literally. I thought it
would be obvious that he means he has made peace with dying, not that he
has literally spoken to God and literally gotten answers back. And I
don't think most readers would interpret it that way either. Hojo is
obviously nuts, so nothing he says is credible. "Return to Earth"
involves a main character which is a spirit, which would offend a
Southern Baptist far more than a demented man who is obviously a suicide
bomber who merely never strapped explosives to his waist.
Face it, readers find psychos fascinating, and a psycho character is a
big selling point.
> "In Memoriam" is (presumably) a horror piece. "Return to Earth" is
> fantasy-fic. I believe the markets are fairly equal in size.
"In Memoriam" is gruesome mainstream. There are no vampires or
knife-wielding maniacs preying on innocent slaughter-fodder, so I
wouldn't call it horror.
> In conclusion, if I were attempting to sell one - as a stone hearted
> businessmen - I would go with "Return to Earth."
Thanks for your input. Now, what made you so mad?
Miki
Miki Kocic
Ejucaided Redneck wrote:
> Miki Kocic wrote:
>
>
>>I mean the story contained in this message. I decided to follow Joe's
>>example and put on my salesman hat and write a story intended to sell.
>
>
> To whom?
Good question. *Is* it likely to sell anywhere?
Miki
Opus
ones mentioned in your list. But my suggestion would be to begin perusing
the internet relentlessly for fiction sites that resemble what "you"
consider to be the genre on this. It's what I'm having to do with my
humorous essays. First find the magazine or e-zine that best fits the style
of story their readership would appreciate, and then tweak it gently to fit
exactly what they have published previously. It's what they say to do in my
comedy books, and in my writing books, including the Writer's Market. I'd
also pick up a few magazines of fiction that sells this genre, whatever you
have classified that to be, and then read what they're selling. Read what
the buyers want to read, then you've got your path lain for tweaking.
HTH,
Opie
Miki Kocic wrote:
--
"'Slut' used to mean a slovenly woman. Now it means a woman who will go to
bed with everyone. This is considered a bad thing in a woman, although
perfectly fabulous in a man. 'Bitch' means a woman who will go to bed with
everyone but you."
--Cynthia Heimel
http://www.carlarene.com
http://www.opusgraphics.net
Ejucaided Redneck
Not in any market _I'm_ familiar with.
I've mentioned never writing a word without thinking about an ultimate
audience, which means, personal letters excepted, print publication. I
have a general sense of where to market my stuff. Any writer who
intends to be published ought to have that sense. So sez I, anyway.
It's not a matter of pandering to that market, but rather of having a
personal draw towards a certain type of writing and an awareness of
where to find it. And therefore, where to submit my own stuff. Most of
us write the kind of fiction we like to read.
--
You _really_ know times (and
the language) have changed when
you're listening to an Uncle Dave
Macon piece recorded in 1937 and
hear him sing "I'm the gayest old
dude that's out."
Ejucaided Redneck
> In Memoriam
> "Now, here's my plan," said Batty.
> Hicks glared at him. Hojo just grunted, head down. It wasn't funny.
Who said [--or what implies-- it is?
> They sat naked and barehanded in a fifteen-foot pit with vertical sides,
> topped by a five-hundred-pound lid.
How does your narrative voice know the weight of the door? If these
guys can see fifteen foot walls and one another, there must be something
else in there.
> Hicks studied him like a lab rat.
Hicks is like a lab rat? Or the guy he's looking at?
> "Nope." Batty stood up so his skinny, uncircumcised knob was in Hicks'
> crosshairs.
". . . crosshairs?"
> Hicks looked away.
Most men would react a bit more strongly to having a dick waved in their
face.
> "There are bound to be caves and tunnels below us," Batty continued, his
> hands fluttering at his sides, as if to draw attention to his dick.
How do fluttering hands draw attention to someone's crotch?
> "There are always caves and tunnels under the ground. We dig until we
> find one, then we follow it to shore."
Makes no sense.
> Like a rattlesnake, Hojo's arm sprang up and brained Batty with the
> pebble.
Poor choice of simile. Snakes bite, they don't club. And a pebble is
too small to brain anyone or anything.
> Hicks gawped.
". . .gawped?" If that's a typo for "gawked?"
> "No." Hojo looked up for the first time. "I've made my peace with God.
> I'm ready to die. But survival instinct would have made me betray my
> word to my Maker."
So he murders someone instead?
> Hicks nodded as if he understood. "But you don't mind if I try it, do
> you? You can stay here if--"
>
> Hojo sprang up like a mongoose and slammed into Hicks. Hicks lost his
> breath and was stunned. When he recovered his senses, Hojo's bulk was
> on top of him, and Hojo's hands were wrapped around his neck. Hicks saw
> black spots before he realized his legs were still bent. He kicked with
> all his might, and Hojo staggered back two steps.
> Still almost unconscious, gasping and wheezing, Hicks scrambled across
> the pit. Hojo pounced on him just as his hands reached Batty's ankles.
> Hojo knelt on Hicks' back, pressed one hand against the nape of his
> neck, and pulled on his forehead. Hicks jerked his arms back. Batty's
> body arced over him, and Batty's penis went in Hojo's mouth.
> Hojo sprang off and staggered away, gurgling and moaning. Hicks lay
> flat, sucking wind and watching Hojo collapse to his knees. When he
> felt able, Hicks stood up, hefted the biggest rock he could lift, and
> held it with both hands above Hojo's head.
This is cartoon violence. The "penis in Hojo's mouth" is silly.
You can --and have-- done a _lot_ better than this.
--
The Yellow Peril at Moore's Grocery
COLD
BEER
TOGO
-- Jonathan Williams, from AN EAR IN BARTRAM'S TREE, c. 1962
Joel Crum
$sO4.1...@news20.bellglobal.com:
> Now, what made you so mad?
Mad? Gosh I didn't mean to come off as mad! I wasn't mad at all. I do
have a bit of a rhinovirus perhaps that affected my tone. :-)
Huw Lyan Thomas
viathna...@sympatico.ca says...
> In Memoriam
> by Miki Kocic
> Copyright 2004 by Miki Kocic
>
> --------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> "Now, here's my plan," said Batty.
>
> Hicks glared at him. Hojo just grunted, head down. It wasn't funny.
the above seems to me to accomplish nothing except to delay the sinking
of the hook...
> They sat naked and barehanded in a fifteen-foot pit with vertical sides,
> topped by a five-hundred-pound lid. Above them was the bottom of the ocean.
... which is actually pretty intriguing when it arrives.
> "Seriously, guys," said Batty. "We dig down."
>
> Hicks studied him like a lab rat.
Hicks was a lab rat? Try "as if he were" if you mean Batty.
> "Keep going until we run out of air," Batty interrupted, his voice
> barely above a husky whisper.
do you really need the "husky" modifier?
> Hicks lost his
> breath and was stunned. When he recovered his senses, Hojo's bulk was
> on top of him, and Hojo's hands were wrapped around his neck. Hicks saw
> black spots before he realized his legs were still bent. He kicked with
> all his might, and Hojo staggered back two steps.
try to dramatise this more, "show don't tell".
> Still almost unconscious, gasping and wheezing, Hicks scrambled across
> the pit.
Almost unconscious sounds like the wrong description for someone able to
scramble.
> Hojo pounced on him just as his hands reached Batty's ankles.
> Hojo knelt on Hicks' back, pressed one hand against the nape of his
> neck, and pulled on his forehead. Hicks jerked his arms back. Batty's
> body arced over him, and Batty's penis went in Hojo's mouth.
the choreography seems unclear, the penis insertion unlikely (unless,
unlike the penis, I'm missing something). To me, this is what Orson
Scott Card calls an "Oh yeah?" moment. (he lists three deadly reader
responses: Oh yeah? So what? and Huh? which broadly translate to "I
don't believe that happened", "I don't care about what happened", and "I
don't understand what just happened".
I hope you won't take this the wrong way, but I think your
> I merely "proved I could do it."
will have to wait for validation with this one until you have a cheque
in your hand.
What you *have* shown is that, in a story where you apparently strained
to conform to standards you don't really believe in, you produced work
that's less good than your usual output (which is IMO closer to being
commercially publishable than this).
The key problem for me was that I never cared about what happened to the
characters. This arose, I believe, for two related reasons:
1) no strong POV
2) not enough space to develop and differentiate the characters.
You certainly had plenty of conflict, but unless the reader cares about
the outcome (which means caring about the characters), conflict is
sterile.
--
Huw
http://huw.hexlibris.com
Mick
> It's only 667 words long and takes mere minutes to read. And it's not
> science fiction or fantasy.
>
> I mean the story contained in this message. I decided to follow Joe's
> example and put on my salesman hat and write a story intended to sell.
> It's not as good as something like "Return to Earth," but IMO far more
> likely to catch the eye of an editor.
I really think the 'depends on the market' comments count bigtime here. "Return
To Earth" would, IMHO, be saleable to sci-fi/fantasy markets. I would have
enjoyed reading it in an anthology, and wouldn't have thought it misplaced or
below par. I can't think of anything you could sell "In Memoriam" to. No
offense meant, of course, but I don't think it's actually more commercial than
RTE. I agreed with most of Joel's points.
Have a look at the "Strange Horizons" submission guidelines -
http://www.strangehorizons.com/guidelines/fiction.shtml
Also, try the link at the bottom of that page to go to their archives and read
old stories. "Return To Earth" would fit in there, IMHO.
Mick.
--
"You are the music while the music lasts" - Antonio Damasio (after TS Eliot).
Quadpus
>
> I mean the story contained in this message. I decided to follow Joe's
> example and put on my salesman hat and write a story intended to sell.
> It's not as good as something like "Return to Earth," but IMO far more
> likely to catch the eye of an editor. Turns out writing commercial
> fiction isn't against my principles after all--although, like the gay
> man who married and fathered two children, I merely "proved I could do it."
I think this is about as uncommercial as anything I've read from you.
Where would you market this? That's the most important first step in
writing fiction with the intent to sell it -- decide who you're
writing for, and write a story that looks like something they'd
publish.
You stand a good enough chance of writing marketable fiction just by
doing what you naturally do and working to do it as best you can,
though. Like I keep saying, there's a publisher out there for nearly
every style and sensibility. You just have to find them.
Miki Kocic
Opus wrote:
> Miki, haven't read this yet but intend to, even though I wasn't one of the
> ones mentioned in your list. But my suggestion would be to begin perusing
> the internet relentlessly for fiction sites that resemble what "you"
> consider to be the genre on this. It's what I'm having to do with my
> humorous essays. First find the magazine or e-zine that best fits the style
> of story their readership would appreciate, and then tweak it gently to fit
> exactly what they have published previously. It's what they say to do in my
> comedy books, and in my writing books, including the Writer's Market. I'd
> also pick up a few magazines of fiction that sells this genre, whatever you
> have classified that to be, and then read what they're selling. Read what
> the buyers want to read, then you've got your path lain for tweaking.
Mercy buckets. Bob says the same thing in his message. After getting a
near-record number of replies in near-record time, to a story I didn't
even ask people to read and comment on--not that I mind anyone reading
and commenting on it--and near-unanimity that it wouldn't sell, I think
I'll have to re-evaluate my conception of what gets published versus
what is good fiction but doesn't.
Miki
Miki Kocic
Ejucaided Redneck wrote:
> Miki Kocic wrote:
>
>>Good question. *Is* it likely to sell anywhere?
>
> Not in any market _I'm_ familiar with.
>
> I've mentioned never writing a word without thinking about an ultimate
> audience, which means, personal letters excepted, print publication. I
> have a general sense of where to market my stuff. Any writer who
> intends to be published ought to have that sense. So sez I, anyway.
>
> It's not a matter of pandering to that market, but rather of having a
> personal draw towards a certain type of writing and an awareness of
> where to find it. And therefore, where to submit my own stuff. Most of
> us write the kind of fiction we like to read.
I thought I understood what the markets I've examined want - comfortably
familiar situations expressed in non-cliche ways, events that people
have read about or seen on TV or in movies before but couched
differently, "conflict in every paragraph" (which was my intention when
I wrote this piece), action and tittilation. But I was also angry when
I wrote this thing, hence the darkness and violence. I guess I'll have
to try again in a calmer mood.
Thanks again for your help.
Miki
Joe Konrath
several adult themed elements, which make it a tough sell, and really
doesn't make too much sense.
If you want to sell a story, find a market first. Then study the market, and
write something similar. You begin this story in the middle of the action,
which is good, but the reader also needs to know why the characters are
trapped there, and how.
Contrary to what others have suggested, writing with sales in mind has
nothing to do with selling out. It has much more to do with learning the
business, anticipating an editor's needs, and marketing yourself and your
work to meet those needs.
If you want to sell stories, treat this like a business. That might mean
adjusting your style to what the industry is buying, but that's still much
easier than writing whatever you want to write and hoping someone will share
your vision.
J
--
WHISKEY SOUR by J.A. Konrath
Coming in hardcover, June 2004, from Hyperion
www.jakonrath.com
"Quadpus" <qua...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:8kjf20pudkhsmd557...@4ax.com...
Miki Kocic
Ejucaided Redneck wrote:
> How does your narrative voice know the weight of the door? If these
> guys can see fifteen foot walls and one another, there must be something
> else in there.
The narrative voice is an interesting thing. I was aiming for *no* POV
at all. In that way the piece is experimental. The inconsistencies you
point out are bang on and merely things it took another pair of eyes to
notice.
> ". . .gawped?" If that's a typo for "gawked?"
It's a nonexistent word I've seen used before, and it means to stare at
something with an open mouth, usually in astonishment. The fact that
I've seen it used in published writing was my precise reason for using
it here. I was aiming for comfortable familiarity.
>>"No." Hojo looked up for the first time. "I've made my peace with God.
>> I'm ready to die. But survival instinct would have made me betray my
>>word to my Maker."
>
> So he murders someone instead?
I guess it isn't obvious that he's demented. My bad. I was thinking
that religious nuts are highly familiar these days through the existence
of suicide bombers, so a religious nut in my story wouldn't be a stretch.
> You can --and have-- done a _lot_ better than this.
I agree with you 100%, but for the sake of cross-reference, where would
you say I've done a lot better?
Miki
Miki Kocic
Huw Lyan Thomas wrote:
>>They sat naked and barehanded in a fifteen-foot pit with vertical sides,
>>topped by a five-hundred-pound lid. Above them was the bottom of the ocean.
>
> ... which is actually pretty intriguing when it arrives.
Ya, if I rewrote, I would make this the first paragraph. The idea was
to place the characters in such an extreme predicament that the reader
and editor, who assumes they're going to get out of it, is persuaded to
keep reading in order to find out how. The "Now here's my plan"
statement should really follow the above, not precede it. But you get
what I was trying to do--create a 1950s style cliffhanger ending because
that's what readers are used to, except with the innovation that it's
at the start of the story. I guess I'm a failure as a sellout--even
when actively trying to do it, I couldn't write something shamelessly pulpy.
> the choreography seems unclear, the penis insertion unlikely (unless,
> unlike the penis, I'm missing something). To me, this is what Orson
> Scott Card calls an "Oh yeah?" moment. (he lists three deadly reader
> responses: Oh yeah? So what? and Huh? which broadly translate to "I
> don't believe that happened", "I don't care about what happened", and "I
> don't understand what just happened".
Two people commented on the penis in mouth thing, you and Bob. He
called it silly, while you call it unlikely. It was my grim comment on
the kind of religious nut who thinks murder is okay but a homosexual
experience is damning. Again, I'm a failure as a sellout, because
that's not really the kind of thing the midrange published fiction I've
read does. But the fact that the incident is unbelievable has been
noted. Thanks.
> I hope you won't take this the wrong way, but I think your
>
>>I merely "proved I could do it."
>
> will have to wait for validation with this one until you have a cheque
> in your hand.
Not quite what I meant. I proved that I could write something contrary
to my voice and nature.
> What you *have* shown is that, in a story where you apparently strained
> to conform to standards you don't really believe in, you produced work
> that's less good than your usual output (which is IMO closer to being
> commercially publishable than this).
And there's the key point. I *don't* really believe in having
characters say things such as, "Now, here's my plan." I don't believe
in extreme predicaments, or manipulating the reader with grabby
openings, or life-and-death violence, or hot-button issues. So you hit
the nail right on the head. This effort is so shitty because I was
trying to adapt to the marketplace. I'll keep trying, but right now the
prospects don't look good.
> You certainly had plenty of conflict, but unless the reader cares about
> the outcome (which means caring about the characters), conflict is
> sterile.
Thank you very, very much. You just earned a dedication in any book I
ever put out. I just didn't know what you have told me.
Miki
Miki Kocic
Mick wrote:
> I really think the 'depends on the market' comments count bigtime here. "Return
> To Earth" would, IMHO, be saleable to sci-fi/fantasy markets. I would have
> enjoyed reading it in an anthology, and wouldn't have thought it misplaced or
> below par. I can't think of anything you could sell "In Memoriam" to. No
> offense meant, of course, but I don't think it's actually more commercial than
> RTE. I agreed with most of Joel's points.
>
> Have a look at the "Strange Horizons" submission guidelines -
> http://www.strangehorizons.com/guidelines/fiction.shtml
>
> Also, try the link at the bottom of that page to go to their archives and read
> old stories. "Return To Earth" would fit in there, IMHO.
Thanks very muxch for the feedback and the link. I've read the
guidelines and plan to explore them in more detail. Rather than RTE,
which is on Google, I think I'll write something fresh for them and ask
people to crit it in email.
People seem unanimous that IM is less commercial than RTE. It only
means that I'm not that good at pretzeling myself into an uncomfortable
way of writing. Either there will be markets for the kind of thing I
like to write or there won't. We'll find out.
Miki
Miki Kocic
Quadpus wrote:
> I think this is about as uncommercial as anything I've read from you.
> Where would you market this? That's the most important first step in
> writing fiction with the intent to sell it -- decide who you're
> writing for, and write a story that looks like something they'd
> publish.
>
> You stand a good enough chance of writing marketable fiction just by
> doing what you naturally do and working to do it as best you can,
> though. Like I keep saying, there's a publisher out there for nearly
> every style and sensibility. You just have to find them.
Thanks very much for the read and the comments. See my replies to other
people, because my hands are getting tired and I don't want to chew up
bandwidth by repeating myself.
Miki
Miki Kocic
specific publication and aiming for it, or can you write something
that's vaguely suitable for several publications and hope one of them bites?
I have only one comment:
Joe Konrath wrote:
> If you want to sell stories, treat this like a business. That might mean
> adjusting your style to what the industry is buying, but that's still much
> easier than writing whatever you want to write and hoping someone will share
> your vision.
Absolutely speaking, it's a lot easier to write whatever you are moved
to write than go through the effort of adjusting your style. It makes
it harder to get published, but it's easier to do.
Miki
Joe Konrath
market--which is one of the reasons it's so hard to break into markets.
There's nothing wrong with writing for yourself. I have hundreds of stories
that will never see print, but I'm happy that I wrote them.
However, it's a bit egotistical to think that anything you create is
saleable. Not that you're implying that, but those who write without a
market in mind, and then try to fit their work into a market, are carving
keys without bothering to study what kind of lock it might open.
Maybe you will find a lock your key fits, but you have a much better shot if
you know what kind of lock you want to open before you start carving.
Depending on the genre you write in, there may be many or few markets for
your work.
Go to a bookstore. Buy some magazines. Read them, and figure out what
they're looking for. Then try to write something that fits.
Joe
--
WHISKEY SOUR by J.A. Konrath
Coming in hardcover, June 2004, from Hyperion
www.jakonrath.com
"Miki Kocic" <viathna...@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:73ZVb.3402$sO4.5...@news20.bellglobal.com...
ROBOTIC MONK
really make it shine.
++++++
Hollywood is nothing but money.
ROBOTIC MONK
know you mean business, but as a customer, I'm happy to see something
different. How are those editors going to find the next Stephen King
when they are too busy trying to sell the same old crap?
I don't think all sold writers should write for the market when they
could miss their potential fans. If there are so many guidelines about
what to write, won't most of those things written be to too close to the
same?
Opus
> could miss their potential fans.
>
distributed? You can't do that until you write for a market that is
going to pay for it.
Opus
--
"'Slut' used to mean a slovenly woman. Now it means a woman who will go
to bed with everyone. This is considered a bad thing in a woman,
Joe Konrath
"ROBOTIC MONK" <Jesse...@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:11066-40...@storefull-3333.bay.webtv.net...
> Joe, don't you think we got too many writers doing the same shit?
Well, sort of. But not really.
Genres exist, and each has different rules that define them. If you want to
sell what you write, you'd do best to pick a genre (horror, sci-fi, mystery,
thriller, romance, lit fic, etc.), read everything you can in that genre,
and then write something that falls into that genre.
These genres have fans, who are hungry for new content. Ellery Queen's
Mystery Magazine has been publishing stores for many decades, but if you
pick up an issue you'd be suprised how different the stories within it are,
even though they all fall into the mystery genre.
Even when writing about the same thing, different writers have different
takes on it. Look at the monthly AFO challenge. The criteria is the same for
all who enter, but rarely do two people write simliar stories.
Lets say, instead of a story, you're making a door. The door is only limited
by your creativity--it could be a hundred feet tall, made out of tin,
triangular, etc.
Editors are looking to buy doors. But they only look for the ones that fit
their pre-existing doorways.
You could search around, hoping to find an editor with a triangular doorway
who will buy your unique door. Or you can go to the editor's house, measure
the door, and create something that you're pretty sure will fit.
You can still make the door creative--using different colors, different
materials, textures, designs, hinges, etc. Mickey Spillaine doesn't write
like Agatha Christie who doesn't write like me. But we're all mystery
writers, who write about solving murders.
If you want to sell, your best chance is to write for the market. Creating
your own market is much harder. This is a business, and business is ruled by
the almighty dollar.
Know what editors are looking to buy, then you can write something that will
sell.
Joe
ROBOTIC MONK
shared with other markets? I buy horror and sci-fi mostly. The only
reason I ever slipped into differeint genres was because Stephen King
showed me that a good story does not need to have monsters in it to be
good.
So, you could be writing a mystery where a character (serial killer)
has horrific, monster dreams that actually leave clues for the reader.
What genre would this be? Mystery/Horror?
King's "From A Buick 8" read more like a mystery for me, but had those
horror elements.
Seymour Grass
| Joe, I know the business stuff makes sense, but what if that market is
| shared with other markets? I buy horror and sci-fi mostly. The only
| reason I ever slipped into differeint genres was because Stephen King
| showed me that a good story does not need to have monsters in it to be
| good.
There's an epiphany for you. ;-)
--
JPDavid http://www.virtualtourist.com/m/520b8/
John's Joint:: http://jpdavid.freewebspace.com/
"Don't be afraid to take a big step if one is indicated. You can't cross a
chasm in two small jumps.--David Lloyd George
Joe Konrath
a supernatural thriller.
J
--
WHISKEY SOUR by J.A. Konrath
Coming in hardcover, June 2004, from Hyperion
www.jakonrath.com
"ROBOTIC MONK" <Jesse...@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:14707-40...@storefull-3333.bay.webtv.net...
Miki Kocic
This is the second time in two days someone has said something of
incalculable value to me. Namely:
Joe Konrath wrote:
> There's nothing wrong with writing for yourself. I have hundreds of stories
> that will never see print, but I'm happy that I wrote them.
If you're saying that you wrote those *after* you became an established
writer and the demands on your time increased, then it's tremendously
heartening. What it means to me is that I can still write the kind of
stuff I want to write from time to time even if I'm cranking out
specification fiction for money.
Miki
Joe Konrath
last two AFO challenge stories I posted will never see print, I'm positive
of that. Just did them for fun.
And also, while writing for markets is hard work, there's still a tremendous
amount of pride and enjoyment that comes from it. I've almost finished my
second novel, and I'm really enjoying the process. This is the first book
I've written expressly for publication, and it's a lot of fun.
The important thing is to keep writing, either for the markets or for
yourself.
Writer's write.
J
--
WHISKEY SOUR by J.A. Konrath
Coming in hardcover, June 2004, from Hyperion
www.jakonrath.com
"Miki Kocic" <viathna...@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:wDgWb.5177$sO4.7...@news20.bellglobal.com...
Miki Kocic
ROBOTIC MONK wrote:
> Not bad. You might work on this one. Maybe a surprise ending would
> really make it shine.
Wow. Someone actually liked the darn thing. You didn't find it too
juvenile (which is the impression I get on rereading it)?
Miki
ROBOTIC MONK
interesting variation. I felt how creepy that could be. How in the
hell do you get out or survive? How deep is it? Stuff like that. The
story has potential.
Mick
> I agree, Miki. It's a lot easier to write for yourself than to write for a
> market--which is one of the reasons it's so hard to break into markets.
>
> There's nothing wrong with writing for yourself. I have hundreds of stories
> that will never see print, but I'm happy that I wrote them.
>
> However, it's a bit egotistical to think that anything you create is
> saleable. Not that you're implying that, but those who write without a
> market in mind, and then try to fit their work into a market, are carving
> keys without bothering to study what kind of lock it might open.
>
> Maybe you will find a lock your key fits, but you have a much better shot if
> you know what kind of lock you want to open before you start carving.
Okay, this is a worryingly accurate metaphor. For me, that is. At the moment,
I'm writing when I can, trying different styles, lengths, genres, whatever. I
hope to identify my strengths and weaknesses, and to find out if any particular
genre really appeals to me. But yes, I'm trying to carve good keys without
knowing whether they'll suit any locks. True, there are occasional key
collectors who appreciate a finely wrought key for itself, irrespective of its
lock-worthiness, but there aren't a lot of them, and I'm not sure that the
metaphor stretches to an analogous publishing market.
I am trying, tentatively and in a small way, to fit my key-carving to locks.
The challenges have something of this about them: here are the requirements, go
write your attempt to fulfil them. So, I'm getting a little practise at this
idea of writing to requirements. But what next?
Assuming, unlikely as it may be, that I can create keys both interesting and
lock-fitting, where do I go next? How do I match my key-making ability to the
vast array of locks out there? I am overwhelmed by the size of the market. I
have no specific interest, no favourite genre. My fiction reading is sporadic
and varies across genres, and from supposedly high- to low-brow literary
tastes. I don't find writing within any particular genre much easier than
others.
One element of the reasonable and normal response to my questions is to
research the market. The market is effing enormous. We all have limits, but I
don't think I'm playing victim to say that mine are unusual. It comes down to
time and energy; therefore it comes down to prioritising your time and
maximising your energy. I can do the former to give myself a couple of hours a
day, and several hours some days, but I can't do much about energy. If I can't
think, I can't think.
So... what to do? How can I learn more about the market in the least
brain-intensive way? Yes, I'm hoping for a short-cut or an easy answer. Are
there websites which survey the market in a way that will help me find the
publications most likely to accept the things I can write? Or is the only
answer to read and read and search and search?
Huw Lyan Thomas
mic...@hotmail.comNOSPAM says...
> So... what to do? How can I learn more about the market in the least
> brain-intensive way? Yes, I'm hoping for a short-cut or an easy answer. Are
> there websites which survey the market in a way that will help me find the
> publications most likely to accept the things I can write? Or is the only
> answer to read and read and search and search?
If your focus is in the US, check Writer's Market, though I think its
organisation leaves something to be desired. For more general (including
UK/Commonwealth/English speaking) coverage, Writer's Handbook is
excellent and has the best and most usable index I've ever seen.
--
Huw
http://huw.hexlibris.com
Mick
Thanks, Huw. I've had a look at the WritersMarket website. Is the book better? I
hadn't heard of Writer's Handbook. I checked Amazon, and their co-buy
recommendation is Writer's and Artist's Yearbook. Have you heard of that one?
Huw Lyan Thomas
mic...@hotmail.comNOSPAM says...
Not sure about website vs book -- I've never joined the site. It doesn't
seem too expensive, though, particularly with the monthly payment/trial.
I bought the 2002 Writers' and Artists' Yearbook, and I wasn't that
impressed with it -- large typeface, lightweight feel. The others are
more densely packed with info, and Writer's Handbook was much better,
IMO. 2004 editions might be substantially updated in terms of their
approach, but I doubt it.
--
Huw
http://huw.hexlibris.com
Quadpus
>
> So... what to do? How can I learn more about the market in the least
> brain-intensive way? Yes, I'm hoping for a short-cut or an easy answer. Are
> there websites which survey the market in a way that will help me find the
> publications most likely to accept the things I can write? Or is the only
> answer to read and read and search and search?
Well, step one, pick a market. You can't research "the market" in a
general sense; you can only research specific magazines and
publishers.
So, yeah, you're going to be stuck reading and reading and searching
and searching. Start at the top -- the Best American Short Story
anthologies, Ploughshares, Glimmer Train, F&SF, Ellery Queen, etc. --
and read the hell out of them. Ads and reviews and author bios in
these publications will point you to lower-tier magazines that might
be more flexible in what they're willing to publish. Acquire copies of
these magazines and read the hell out of them. Find the small,
independent, up-and-coming zines in the same genre -- Writer's Market
guides are good for this -- and read the hell out of those.
Eventually you will start to get a clear picture of what this market
wants in general terms, and you'll probably have a clear sense of at
least a few particular editors' preferences. You'll also probably find
a few that already fit well with your natural writing style.
Miki Kocic
Joe Konrath wrote:
> I've written personal stuff both before and after getting published. The
> last two AFO challenge stories I posted will never see print, I'm positive
> of that. Just did them for fun.
Which IMO is an important reason to write, although some people have
said they don't enjoy the process.
> And also, while writing for markets is hard work, there's still a tremendous
> amount of pride and enjoyment that comes from it. I've almost finished my
> second novel, and I'm really enjoying the process. This is the first book
> I've written expressly for publication, and it's a lot of fun.
How much of a delay is there, usually, between the time a novel is
finished and the time it hits bookstores?
For that matter, how long does it take to write a novel? I know it
probably varies from author to author, but give me a range. I'd say
that right now I write fewer than 8,000 words a week.
> The important thing is to keep writing, either for the markets or for
> yourself.
>
> Writer's write.
And writers write too. <g> Thanks for the feedback, Joe.
Miki
Quadpus
>
> For that matter, how long does it take to write a novel? I know it
> probably varies from author to author, but give me a range. I'd say
> that right now I write fewer than 8,000 words a week.
The truism I always hear is that it takes a year to write a novel. The
average length of a first novel is around 100,000 words, though, so if
you can maintain a rate of 8,000 words a week (and if you can, I am
insanely jealous), you can write one in considerably less time than
that, even if planning and research and editing are taken into
account.
Patrick Null
> For that matter, how long does it take to write a >novel? I know it
> probably varies from author to author, but give >me a range. I'd say
> that right now I write fewer than 8,000 words a >week.
I had read somewhere that if you can write three pages a day(every day), you
can finish a novel(first draft only) in about three months.
Doesn't seem long, does it?
Mick
John Creasey, who used to show up in the Guinness Book of Records as "World's
most prolific novelist", published over 500 novels in 40 years, mainly
detective fiction. I don't know his exact period, but he published in the 50s,
60s and 70s. Supposedly, when he got cranking he wrote them in 10-14 days, and
then edited/revised them two or three times in the next fortnight before
sending them to his various publishers. He used twenty-eight pseudonyms, I
think. I've read several, and I guess those were 60,000-80,000 words. Two of
his more famous detectives were The Baron and Gideon.
Mick
> In article <402BB5E2...@hotmail.comNOSPAM>,
> mic...@hotmail.comNOSPAM says...
> > Huw Lyan Thomas wrote:
> >
> > > In article <402B3BF8...@hotmail.comNOSPAM>,
> > > mic...@hotmail.comNOSPAM says...
> > >
> > > > So... what to do? How can I learn more about the market in the least
> > > > brain-intensive way? Yes, I'm hoping for a short-cut or an easy answer. Are
> > > > there websites which survey the market in a way that will help me find the
> > > > publications most likely to accept the things I can write? Or is the only
> > > > answer to read and read and search and search?
> > >
> > > If your focus is in the US, check Writer's Market, though I think its
> > > organisation leaves something to be desired. For more general (including
> > > UK/Commonwealth/English speaking) coverage, Writer's Handbook is
> > > excellent and has the best and most usable index I've ever seen.
> >
> > Thanks, Huw. I've had a look at the WritersMarket website. Is the book better? I
> > hadn't heard of Writer's Handbook. I checked Amazon, and their co-buy
> > recommendation is Writer's and Artist's Yearbook. Have you heard of that one?
>
> Not sure about website vs book -- I've never joined the site. It doesn't
> seem too expensive, though, particularly with the monthly payment/trial.
Yes, the trial would be my best bet.
> I bought the 2002 Writers' and Artists' Yearbook, and I wasn't that
> impressed with it -- large typeface, lightweight feel. The others are
> more densely packed with info, and Writer's Handbook was much better,
> IMO. 2004 editions might be substantially updated in terms of their
> approach, but I doubt it.
Okay, thanks. It's good to hear from someone who has actually used it, rather than an
advertising blurb :)
Mick
> Mick <mic...@hotmail.comNOSPAM> wrote:
> >
> > So... what to do? How can I learn more about the market in the least
> > brain-intensive way? Yes, I'm hoping for a short-cut or an easy answer. Are
> > there websites which survey the market in a way that will help me find the
> > publications most likely to accept the things I can write? Or is the only
> > answer to read and read and search and search?
>
> Well, step one, pick a market. You can't research "the market" in a
> general sense; you can only research specific magazines and
> publishers.
Okay... Hmmm. This requires thought.
> So, yeah, you're going to be stuck reading and reading and searching
> and searching. Start at the top -- the Best American Short Story
> anthologies, Ploughshares, Glimmer Train, F&SF, Ellery Queen, etc. --
> and read the hell out of them.
Thanks for those names. How do you find 'the top'?
> Ads and reviews and author bios in
> these publications will point you to lower-tier magazines that might
> be more flexible in what they're willing to publish. Acquire copies of
> these magazines and read the hell out of them. Find the small,
> independent, up-and-coming zines in the same genre -- Writer's Market
> guides are good for this -- and read the hell out of those.
Okay, thanks again. This sounds logical.
> Eventually you will start to get a clear picture of what this market
> wants in general terms, and you'll probably have a clear sense of at
> least a few particular editors' preferences. You'll also probably find
> a few that already fit well with your natural writing style.
Thanks again.
Quadpus
>
> Thanks for those names. How do you find 'the top'?
Read read read read read.
Miki Kocic
Quadpus wrote:
> So, yeah, you're going to be stuck reading and reading and searching
> and searching. Start at the top -- the Best American Short Story
> anthologies, Ploughshares, Glimmer Train, F&SF, Ellery Queen, etc. --
Sorry, Quad, but I've read Hitchcock's and EQ, and some of the stuff
published there, such as the Thomassina Webber garbage, hardly makes me
think of "the top." It's part of what led me to decide that there is no
justice in which stories are chosen for publication and which aren't.
I've seen good stories in EQ, but I've also seen awful ones.
Miki
Quadpus
>
> Sorry, Quad, but I've read Hitchcock's and EQ, and some of the stuff
> published there, such as the Thomassina Webber garbage, hardly makes me
> think of "the top." It's part of what led me to decide that there is no
> justice in which stories are chosen for publication and which aren't.
>
> I've seen good stories in EQ, but I've also seen awful ones.
Well, that's why market research means reading zines, bro -- sometimes
you find out your vision of good fiction isn't compatible with the
editor's vision, and you can save yourself the trouble of collecting
rejection slips from them. There are many fish in this sea.
But being "the top" in this sense doesn't really have anything to do
with quality. H-cock and EQ are the only mystery fiction magazines you
can buy in damn near any bookstore, grocery store, or newsstand in the
country, and they've probably got the best pay rates, too -- if you
were writing mystery shorts, where would you want to see them
published?
Miki Kocic
Quadpus wrote:
> The truism I always hear is that it takes a year to write a novel. The
> average length of a first novel is around 100,000 words, though, so if
> you can maintain a rate of 8,000 words a week (and if you can, I am
> insanely jealous), you can write one in considerably less time than
> that, even if planning and research and editing are taken into
> account.
Hey, I didn't say that more than 500 words of those fewer than 8,000 are
worth reading. For example, I just posted part 2 of "God is Cock," and
I rewrote the first 1,000 words of it about 10 times.
Thanks for the figures, tho.
Miki
Dave Allyn
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
email: dallyn_spam at yahoo dot com
In the words of Abe Lincoln when asked to review a book
he didn't care for:
"For the people that like that sort of thing, I think it's
just the sort of thing they would like."
Miki Kocic
Dave Allyn wrote:
> Miki--do you want this archived in the lockbox???
Sure, why not? I wrote and posted the wretched thing, after all. But
please preserve the prefatory passage.
Miki