The Importance of Magic in Fantasy
Dan Goodman
In article <5u1k80$3...@freenet-news.carleton.ca>,
Sean Radford <ar...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA> wrote:
>
>
>I set out to write a big, sweeping story, and am about 350 pages
>along (single spaced). I've begun to worry, though, about the
>progession of magic in the book. It starts out with almost
>no signs of magic, with just hints here and there until almost page
>300, when there is a broader introduction to the nature of sorcery
>and my characters begin to experiment with it (This story grew
>to such an extent it will have to be at least two books, btw, so
>we're looking at 700 single spaced pages anyway, maybe more)
Or you'll have to do some major cutting. Don't rule that out. Writers
_do_ cut that drastically, sometimes.
>I'm wondering if editors are going to be unhappy with this. Looking
>at some of the series which litter my library I see a much earlier
>introduction of sorcery, and see it used much more often (ie, LOTR
>has Moraine throwing fireballs at torlics (sp?) within the
>first 100 pages, and lots more demonstrations all through the book.
>On the other hand I'm about 400 pages into J.V. Jones' The Bakers
>Boy (The Book of Words series), and there've been only a few small
>incidents of magic use.
>Are there preferences among editors/houses. I note Del Ray says all
>submissions must be focused around magic, I believe the quote was "Have magic
>intrinsic to the plot" or something like that. Should I go back and
>see if I can't introduce more magic earlier on?
To see what the preferences are, _read what that publisher has published
recently_. Also, read interviews with the editor(s). (For leads to such
interviews, web to www.speculations.com.) And for a _lot_ of information
on the markets, read Locus.
But keep in mind that "too different" can be more salable than "not
different enough".
--
Dan Goodman
dsg...@visi.com
http://www.visi.com/~dsgood/index.html
Whatever you wish for me, may you have twice as much.
Dorothy J Heydt
In article <5u1k80$3...@freenet-news.carleton.ca>,
Sean Radford <ar...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA> wrote:
>
>I set out to write a big, sweeping story, and am about 350 pages
>along (single spaced).
Okay, let's sort of take this piecemeal as we go. I do hope you
have already realized that before you send the thing to an editor
it must be *double* spaced, with at least one-inch margins all
around, ragged-right (unjustified) margins, a constant-width
font, and your name and the title and the page number on the top
of every page. And it might be an idea to type/print it
double-spaced even now, so that you can go over the manuscript
and fix a word here, a phrase here, and not be driven to writing
tiny little crabbed notes in the margin.
> I've begun to worry, though, about the
>progession of magic in the book. It starts out with almost
>no signs of magic, with just hints here and there until almost page
>300, when there is a broader introduction to the nature of sorcery...
>I'm wondering if editors are going to be unhappy with this....
Wellll, I can't judge it unseen. It is certainly possible to
start the story without magic being practiced until the right
user, opportunity, and target all meet on page 300. If you have
planted enough references to clue the reader that this is a
fantasy story in which magic is practiced, and not a hard-sf
story full of integrated circuits and spacecraft.
It depends on whether you can bring it off, really; if you can
make it work, it'll work.
>at some of the series which litter my library I see a much earlier
>introduction of sorcery, and see it used much more often (ie, LOTR
>has Moraine throwing fireballs at torlics (sp?) within the
>first 100 pages,
Halt. Whatever it is you're describing, it isn't Tolkien.
Robert Jordan maybe? I read his first volume *once* and said
"Never no more," so I can't be sure.
So let's look at Tolkien instead. Magic is mentioned here and
there; it's sort of taken for granted that there is some
somewhere, but you don't see any. Are Gandalf's fireworks
magical? Or are they just made of chemicals, paper, and
centuries of skill? Does magic bring out the Ring inscription?
Or is it merely the heat of the fire? Does magic turn the Nazgul
away from Frodo on Weathertop? Not according to Aragorn: "More
deadly to him was the name of Elbereth." Holiness, not magic,
drove the Nazgul away.
When the Company gets to Rivendell, Galadriel finally says, "This
is magic, you can see it if you like," and shows them her Mirror.
This is seven-eighths of the way through the first volume. So it
is possible to bring it off: but Tolkien was a master who had
been reading and writing all his long life, and could bring off
damn near anything.
>Are there preferences among editors/houses. I note Del Ray says all
*nitpick mode on* it's Del Rey. *NM off*
>submissions must be focused around magic, I believe the quote was "Have magic
>intrinsic to the plot" or something like that....
I have not seen this and am not sure I believe it. Possibly it
was part of a set of criteria for a particular line of sorcerous
fiction? Or perhaps you have slightly misremembered a line that
was meant to say, "If you're writing a fantasy story, make it
*fantasy,* such that without the fantastic elements the story
wouldn't work."
Let me give you an example of what happens when you *don't* do
this. I recently read a novel, _Cold Iron_ by Melisa Michaels,
which is about a Berkeley PI who is called in by a rock groupie
who is convinced that somebody's going to murder the group's lead
singer. So the PI, although she prefers Mozart, joins the entourage,
and is introduced to sex, drugs, and rock'n'roll. Other plot
elements include child abuse, lawyers, and murder.
Oh, yes, and the rock star is an elf and the heroine is given a
pair of magical earplugs so she can listen to his music without
going deaf. But that's purely extraneous and the book would have
been more focussed without it.
Don't write that kind. (I don't care if Michaels *did* get
published.) Write a story where the fantastic is an integral
part of the story, and write it well, and then sell it.
Dorothy J. Heydt
Albany, California
djheydt@uclink
(My account might go away at any moment; if I disappear, I haven't died.)
Pamela Dean Dyer-Bennet
ar...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Sean Radford) writes:
>Are there preferences among editors/houses. I note Del Ray says all
>submissions must be focused around magic, I believe the quote was "Have magic
>intrinsic to the plot" or something like that. Should I go back and
>see if I can't introduce more magic earlier on?
Not unless you have some other reason, intrinsic to the book, for
wanting to do so. I'd say send it to some editors who don't have Del
Rey's requirements and see what they say. If nobody can hang on until
the magic comes up, you may have a problem, but it may not be where
the magic comes up in any case.
Ace Books used to insist that there be some indication of magic very
early on. If you look at the prologue to Emma Bull's WAR FOR THE OAKS
you can see that insistence in action. I like the prologue, as I like
all Emma's stuff, but I actually preferred the original opening in the
bar. Ace seems to be still insisting on such stuff; Nick O'Donohoe's
first Crossroads book has a fantastical opening that I don't like
nearly so well as the first chapter in the veterinary hospital.
When I wrote TAM LIN for Terri Windling, who was with Ace Books when
Emma had to put that prologue in WftO, I wouldn't do a prologue, but I
was persuaded to put in one inexplicable scene fairly early on to
reassure the readers. A lot of them didn't notice and got pretty
upset at what they considered the late introduction of magic into the
book. But it's sold better than any of my other books, so go figure.
--
"Moreover, fantasticality does a good deal better than
sham psychology." -- Virginia Woolf
-----------------------------------------------------------
Pamela Dean Dyer-Bennet pd...@ddb.com
Sean Radford
Dorothy J Heydt (djh...@uclink.berkeley.edu) writes:
> Sean Radford <ar...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA> wrote:
> Okay, let's sort of take this piecemeal as we go. I do hope you
> have already realized that before you send the thing to an editor
> it must be *double* spaced, with at least one-inch margins all
Yes. It's single-spaced merely for convenience at the moment.
>> I've begun to worry, though, about the
>>progession of magic in the book. It starts out with almost
>>no signs of magic, with just hints here and there until almost page
>>300, when there is a broader introduction to the nature of sorcery...
>
>>I'm wondering if editors are going to be unhappy with this....
>
> Wellll, I can't judge it unseen. It is certainly possible to
> start the story without magic being practiced until the right
> user, opportunity, and target all meet on page 300. If you have
> planted enough references to clue the reader that this is a
> fantasy story in which magic is practiced, and not a hard-sf
> story full of integrated circuits and spacecraft.
>
> It depends on whether you can bring it off, really; if you can
> make it work, it'll work.
>
Well _I_ think it works, but I don't know if editors will
accept the swords without the sorcery - at least at the begining. :)
>>at some of the series which litter my library I see a much earlier
>>introduction of sorcery, and see it used much more often (ie, LOTR
>>has Moraine throwing fireballs at torlics (sp?) within the
>>first 100 pages,
>
> Halt. Whatever it is you're describing, it isn't Tolkien.
> Robert Jordan maybe? I read his first volume *once* and said
> "Never no more," so I can't be sure.
Yes, I meant Jordan. What's wrong with Jordan? I like his series.
> So let's look at Tolkien instead. Magic is mentioned here and
> there; it's sort of taken for granted that there is some
> somewhere, but you don't see any. Are Gandalf's fireworks
Yes, I was thinking this as well, but as you say alter, Tolkien
was a master, and I don't flatter myself that my writing compares.
>>Are there preferences among editors/houses. I note Del Ray says all
> *nitpick mode on* it's Del Rey. *NM off*
>>submissions must be focused around magic, I believe the quote was "Have magic
>>intrinsic to the plot" or something like that....
>
> I have not seen this and am not sure I believe it. Possibly it
> was part of a set of criteria for a particular line of sorcerous
> fiction? Or perhaps you have slightly misremembered a line that
> was meant to say, "If you're writing a fantasy story, make it
> *fantasy,* such that without the fantastic elements the story
> wouldn't work."
>
It's contained in the listing in the Writers Market (1996)
Specifically, it says FICTION: Fantasy ("should have the practice of magic
as an essential element of the plot").
> Let me give you an example of what happens when you *don't* do
> this. I recently read a novel, _Cold Iron_ by Melisa Michaels,
> which is about a Berkeley PI who is called in by a rock groupie
> who is convinced that somebody's going to murder the group's lead
> singer. So the PI, although she prefers Mozart, joins the entourage,
> and is introduced to sex, drugs, and rock'n'roll. Other plot
> elements include child abuse, lawyers, and murder.
>
> Oh, yes, and the rock star is an elf and the heroine is given a
> pair of magical earplugs so she can listen to his music without
> going deaf. But that's purely extraneous and the book would have
> been more focussed without it.
>
> Don't write that kind. (I don't care if Michaels *did* get
> published.) Write a story where the fantastic is an integral
> part of the story, and write it well, and then sell it.
>
Yes, that's what I want to do. This isn't a modern day story, but
I do wonder how much of the "Fantastic" requires magic. Evil, treasonous
dukes and grasping Emperors may not qualify without the fireballs
blowing up monsters.
--
Keep your face to the sunshine and you cannot see the shadows - Helen Keller
Dennis L. McKiernan
Eden -Mouse- Dorn wrote:
> It goes along the lines of another post (I can't remember who to credit,
> sorry) about "black boxes" a while back. Magic was somehow refered to
> as a "black box" that opens up the realm of possibility for the average
> human, as transporters in Star Trek opened up travel from ship to planet,
> etc. And too many magical devices get tiring. Fantasy isn't about
> magic. Fantasy is "good vs evil" and other similar themes, but mostly
> fantasy is about people. Writing is about people and why should fantasy
> be any different?
I believe I was the one who likened magic (etc.) to black boxes.
IMNSHO, a good fantasy can be told with zero (stereotypical) magic in it
... assuming you believe that stories with mythical and mystical
creatures are fantasies. Elves, Dwarves, Giants, Dragons, sphinxes,
leprechauns, talking mice, etc., they aren't overtly "magic," but they
certainly are black boxes. One doesn't need to cast spells or have
magic swords or rings or potions or scrolls or other such in a fantasy,
but one _does_ need fantastic elements in a fantasy.
Fantastic elements can be magic or mystical or mythical or
supernatural (e.g., ghosts, though that may be bordering on horror,
depending on the story itself) creatures. There are probably other
things which I've overlooked, but I believe those are the biggies.
---Dennis
--
Dennis L. McKiernan
Just released: Into the Forge
Forthcoming ('98): Into the Fire
Recent Books: The Dragonstone; Caverns of Socrates
Eden -Mouse- Dorn
In article <5u4h6g$a...@freenet-news.carleton.ca>,
Sean Radford <ar...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA> wrote:
[snipped because I'm not redressing the same issues]
>>>submissions must be focused around magic, I believe the quote was "Have magic
>>>intrinsic to the plot" or something like that....
>>
>> I have not seen this and am not sure I believe it. Possibly it
>> was part of a set of criteria for a particular line of sorcerous
>> fiction? Or perhaps you have slightly misremembered a line that
>> was meant to say, "If you're writing a fantasy story, make it
>> *fantasy,* such that without the fantastic elements the story
>> wouldn't work."
>>
>It's contained in the listing in the Writers Market (1996)
>Specifically, it says FICTION: Fantasy ("should have the practice of magic
>as an essential element of the plot").
It is also stated on the submission guidelines on their webpage. The
way I take it and please, correct me if I'm wrong if you are in the
know out there, is that magic should have a "reason" to exist in this
world. Magical scenes should not appear suddenly just because the author
couldn't come up with another way to solve the latest scourge of monsters.
It goes along the lines of another post (I can't remember who to credit,
sorry) about "black boxes" a while back. Magic was somehow refered to
as a "black box" that opens up the realm of possibility for the average
human, as transporters in Star Trek opened up travel from ship to planet,
etc. And too many magical devices get tiring. Fantasy isn't about
magic. Fantasy is "good vs evil" and other similar themes, but mostly
fantasy is about people. Writing is about people and why should fantasy
be any different?
If you are worried about how you've developed magic, look through the
story and see if it came out of exploration, or (if you'll excuse the
expression) magically appeared one day. If it is the former, leave it;
the later, ditch it. _And_ look at the other examples of what might be
magic, though they have perfectly scientific explanations to you. Is
it magical to your characters?
Now, let me end this before I make more silly mistakes for Dorothy and
Patricia to point out. <g>
Good luck on the book,
Eden (Mouse)
Graydon
>I do wonder how much of the "Fantastic" requires magic. Evil, treasonous
>dukes and grasping Emperors may not qualify without the fireballs
>blowing up monsters.
Buy, beg, or borrow a copy of :The Dragon Waiting: by John M. Ford and
read it, post-haste. Fantastic, in both senses of the term, and some of
the more fantastic bits are _not_ magic, and the magic is integral to the
plot but it's very much not wishing.
The various Liavek books are decent for this as well.
Magic _ought not_ to be fireballs, unsubtle magic does not work well as a
literary device because it is not well constrained and thus bores people.
--
gra...@gooroos.com | Praise ice when it is crossed,
is bouncing again Ale when it is drunk,
try pir...@pobox.com The day at evening-time,
with 'for graydon' in the subject line Domain service when it works.
miketotty
Sean Radford wrote:
>
> It's contained in the listing in the Writers Market (1996)
> Specifically, it says FICTION: Fantasy ("should have the practice of magic
> as an essential element of the plot").
>
> Yes, that's what I want to do. This isn't a modern day story, but
> I do wonder how much of the "Fantastic" requires magic. Evil, treasonous
> dukes and grasping Emperors may not qualify without the fireballs
> blowing up monsters.
IMHO, what Del Rey is saying is that they don't sell histrical fiction.
They want fantasy that includes fantastic elements. These fantasy
elements must be central to the plot of the story, not just background
or set decoration. They most certainly cannot be deus ex machina devices
that conviently salvage heroes from nasty situations.
Another note: your references to magic, swords/sorcery, fireballs, etc.
sounded (to me) extremely rpgish. It is my understanding that fantasy
that is derivative of rpg is rejected pretty quickly by most, but not
all houses.
mike
Sean Radford
Eden -Mouse- Dorn (mo...@shell.wizvax.net) writes:
> In article <5u4h6g$a...@freenet-news.carleton.ca>,
> Sean Radford <ar...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA> wrote:
> If you are worried about how you've developed magic, look through the
> story and see if it came out of exploration, or (if you'll excuse the
> expression) magically appeared one day.
No, I'm not worried about the way I introduce magic and make it
believable. What worries me is that this story is a big one,
and so after the first several hundred pages there's little
more than hints of its existance, such as sorcery being banned
on pain of death. I think it's a good story anyway, but as someone
else pointed out, SF publishers aren't doing historical fiction.
Merely having a good story taking place in a world much like medieval
Earth might decide them to toss the story aside before it ever
even gets to where I've developed magic.
I've heard a number of editors/agents do nothing more than scan the
first few pages looking for something they don't like, then toss
it. Others will read a few chapters in, then if they don't find
what they're looking for, down it goes.
Kurt Giambastiani
On Sun, 31 Aug 1997 10:02:56 GMT, Julian Flood <jul...@argonet.co.uk>
wrote:
>(guess who's got an historical SF novel...)
Guess who's got two. <sigh>
Kurt
August Productions
Manuscript Tracker 2.5 shareware now available
http://www.netcom.com/~krag/august
news://news.sff.net/sff.people.giambastiani
ftp://ftp.sff.net/pub/people/giambastiani/mstshare.zip
Susan E Stone
Dennis L. McKiernan (dl...@worldnet.att.net) wrote:
: IMNSHO, a good fantasy can be told with zero (stereotypical) magic in it
: ... assuming you believe that stories with mythical and mystical
: creatures are fantasies. Elves, Dwarves, Giants, Dragons, sphinxes,
: leprechauns, talking mice, etc., they aren't overtly "magic," but they
: certainly are black boxes. One doesn't need to cast spells or have
: magic swords or rings or potions or scrolls or other such in a fantasy,
: but one _does_ need fantastic elements in a fantasy.
So, would you consider Guy Gavriel Kay's _Lions of Al-Rassan_ or _Song
for Arbonne_ fantasy? There are no mythical creatures in either. The
only thing resembling magic I remember from _Lions_ is that Rodrigo's son
knows what's happening to close family members he's not with. In _Song_,
the high priestesses of Rian had some mystical abilities that impact the
plot, but you could make the novel work without them. Basically, both
books read like historical novels of invented countries. (Whatever
they are, they're great books, IMO.) Is
inventing a country/world enough to make a novel fantasy by itself?
My work-in-process has neither magic nor mystical or mythical creatures.
I'm calling it fantasy, because it's set in an invented world, and there
are certain elements of the supernatural--the good vs. evil conflict is
portrayed as the earthly end of the struggle between the creator-god and
the destroyer-god, and my protagonists fulfill prophecies.
--Susan
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Susan E. Stone * "Love is just a plea, at the deepest
Penn Biology Dept. Academic Office * point of need/We take the reasonable
sst...@sas.upenn.edu * facsimile, most of the time."
http://www.sas.upenn.edu/~sstone/ * --Vigilantes of Love
Dennis L. McKiernan
>
> So, would you consider Guy Gavriel Kay's _Lions of Al-Rassan_ or _Song
> for Arbonne_ fantasy?
I haven't read either of those GGK books, Susan, so I can neither say
yea nor nay.
> The
> only thing resembling magic I remember from _Lions_ is that Rodrigo's son
> knows what's happening to close family members he's not with.
Sounds like a fantastic element to me.
> In _Song_,
> the high priestesses of Rian had some mystical abilities that impact the
> plot, but you could make the novel work without them.
But since he did not, then the fantastic element is therein.
> Basically, both
> books read like historical novels of invented countries.
Historical-seeming or not, a long as there are fantastic elements ...
> Is
> inventing a country/world enough to make a novel fantasy by itself?
Much of SF uses invented worlds, and there the "science" is paramont.
So, in the modern sense given to mean "fantasy," an invented world is
not enough.
> My work-in-process has neither magic nor mystical or mythical creatures.
> I'm calling it fantasy, because it's set in an invented world, and there
> are certain elements of the supernatural--the good vs. evil conflict is
> portrayed as the earthly end of the struggle between the creator-god and
> the destroyer-god, and my protagonists fulfill prophecies.
Well, then, your tale may not fit what I consider to be the "high
fantasy" mold, but depending on how and where and when the prophecies
came about and who or what made them, it could be a fantasy ... or a
biblical tale ... or a supernatural tale ... or ...
Joel Polowin
Dennis L. McKiernan wrote:
> > Basically, both
> > books read like historical novels of invented countries.
>
> Historical-seeming or not, a long as there are fantastic elements ...
What about Ellen Kushner's _Swordspoint_? I don't remember
anything "fantastic" about it except that the atmosphere somehow
pegged it squarely as a fantasy novel.
--
Joel Polowin
jpol...@cyberus.ca.ca.ca but trim address back to one ".ca"
(Spam searchers can fill their address lists with .ca.ca .)
Susan E Stone
: > The
: > only thing resembling magic I remember from _Lions_ is that Rodrigo's son
: > knows what's happening to close family members he's not with.
: Sounds like a fantastic element to me.
Not a very strong one, though. It reminded me of historical novels I've
read where a character has the Sight (e.g. L.M. Montgomery's Emily of New
Moon series). Maybe all those books are really fantasy, but I don't
think of them that way when I read them, and they aren't shelved there.
(Of course, at a certain point genre categories don't mean very much, but
that's a different topic.)
This is splitting hairs, but as a writer I call my own work fantasy or
not based on whether or not I believe the events could happen in this
world. Since my novel involves an invented, albeit nonmagical, world,
it's fantasy. I could include a certain amount of the supernatural in
the form of divine intervention or the Sight in a straight historical or
contemporary story, because I believe in those things. But if a
publisher wants to publish what I think of as a historical novel as
fantasy or vice versa, I'm quite willing to oblige him or her. :-)
Gary Farber
In <340A2A...@worldnet.att.net> Dennis L. McKiernan
[. . .]
: > Is
: > inventing a country/world enough to make a novel fantasy by itself?
: Much of SF uses invented worlds, and there the "science" is paramont.
: So, in the modern sense given to mean "fantasy," an invented world is
: not enough.
I don't do definition wars, and am perfectly happy to let a hundred views
bloom, but I do have my own usages. So far as I'm concerned, a book set
in a non-existent world may fairly be called "fantasy," and no magic need
be involved. Ellen Kushner's SWORDSPOINT is a fine example. I don't know
what else one would call such a work: it's neither historical nor
contemporary, so what else should one call an invented world?
Del Rey, and to a lesser extent, Ace, pretty much ruled that all books
they published as "fantasy" had to have a strong element of magic. So far
as I'm concerned, those are house styles, and very limited ones, at that
-- not universal laws or requirements that anyone else need care about,
if they prefer not to.
[. . .]
: Well, then, your tale may not fit what I consider to be the "high
: fantasy" mold, but depending on how and where and when the prophecies
: came about and who or what made them, it could be a fantasy ... or a
: biblical tale ... or a supernatural tale ... or ...
All of which fit under the general heading of "fantasy," so far as I'm
concerned. But I require no one to agree with me. :-)
--
-- Gary Farber gfa...@panix.com
Copyright 1997 Brooklyn, NY, USA
Dennis L. McKiernan
Susan E Stone wrote:
> But if a
> publisher wants to publish what I think of as a historical novel as
> fantasy or vice versa, I'm quite willing to oblige him or her. :-)
Well said. :-)
Kurt Giambastiani
On 1 Sep 1997 05:12:58 GMT, sst...@mail2.sas.upenn.edu (Susan E Stone)
wrote:
>Dennis L. McKiernan (dl...@worldnet.att.net) wrote:
>: Susan E Stone wrote:
>
>: > The
>: > only thing resembling magic I remember from _Lions_ is that Rodrigo's son
>: > knows what's happening to close family members he's not with.
>
>: Sounds like a fantastic element to me.
>
>Not a very strong one, though.
There was a stronger element of the fantastic in _School for the
Blind_, a so-called mainstream novel I read last year. And I've
reviewed stories in S&S magazines that had absolutely no fantastic
elements. And in _Mistress of the Empire_, magic was completely
peripheral, if I remember rightly. It was there, off-stage, but the
main action was political in nature.
Graydon
In article <340A3A...@cyberus.ca.ca.ca>,
Joel Polowin <jpol...@cyberus.ca.ca.ca> wrote:
>Dennis L. McKiernan wrote:
>> > Basically, both
>> > books read like historical novels of invented countries.
>>
>> Historical-seeming or not, a long as there are fantastic elements ...
>
>What about Ellen Kushner's _Swordspoint_? I don't remember
>anything "fantastic" about it except that the atmosphere somehow
>pegged it squarely as a fantasy novel.
Most of the character are interesting value of insane makes it a fantasy
novel? :]
I think there is very subtle magic in :Swordspoint:; I further think that
everyone in it has a world view that isn't descended from Enlightenment
Rationalism, they're all grasping and greedy and not at all guilty about
it, which is probably where the feel is coming from.
suzanne....@cahners.com
Go away for a few days and you discover you're not really alone.
I ordinarily lurk on this newsgroup, but now that I see that at least a
couple of other people are trying to write Fantasy with limited magic
in it, so I feel I need to ask what they and the other interested persons
think about this subject. There's been some informative discussion so
far, but none of it specifically directed at what I need to know.
It's been established that the book must have some Fantasy elements. I
guess I just need a clearer definition of what they are. Obviously
they can include ghosts, psychic phenomena and mythic beings, but what if
all of these things are rationally explained by the book - just like they
are in science fiction or in reality?
I have two things that I'm doing that I think qualify my book as fantasy,
please help me out and tell me if it's not. First, a lot of the Fantasy
occurs in the heads of the main characters. I have a bunch of deluded
(not delusional, they're quite sane) people stumbling about in my book
trying to live up to the songs and tales of their culture and what they
tell them life should be like, and what the roles of people should be.
They basically brainwash themselves into certain behaviors because they
think they ought to behave that way. (i.e. I'm a big, brave knight, so I
should slay dragons and rescue princesses. I'm the big, brave knight's
sidekick, so I should be more loyal than a cocker spaniel, even if he's a
big jerk, etc.) This is a very simplistic explanation of what I'm trying
to do, here, but I think it gives a general idea at least. What I want
to talk about is how culture brainwashes people into certain behavior,
it's not something I've seen done in Fantasy before, and it's a very real
phenomenon, just look at Chivalry, or modern gangs.
The second thing I'm attempting is to look at personal power. In the
very
interesting book on witchcraft a few years ago, "Drawing Down the
Moon",
one of the witches interviewed described witchcraft as "the art of
getting
things done". I really liked that idea. People who are smart, more
energetic, or visionaries are often accused of being witches, so why
not
have it happen just like that? But then, there's that undefinable
thing
that makes someone a charismatic, or natural leader. That's something
else that's real and we've all seen demonstrated, but that isn't
really
explained, and that I address in this book. There are just some
people
you want to follow or don't dare cross, why? That is a kind of magic,
isn't it? Probably the nearest thing to it any of us are going to
see. I
guess the Fantasy in my book is basically created in the minds of the
characters. Does it not belong in this genre? The story is placed in
a
pretty obviously "high fantasy" type setting and I've done it that way
for
a reason. I'm not spoofing, or sending it up, but I think having a
highly
realistic book set in that familiar setting where everyone is
expecting
someone like Gandalf to pop up at any minute is a good way to take a
new
look at that sort of world. What if you don't have gods on your side,
or
if you aren't fulfilling an ancient prophecy, or you are only a hero
because you think you are? What if the evil warlord of the
neighboring
country really can kick your butt because he's a great soldier? What
if
you're so in love with the ideal visions of reality in your head, that
you
have trouble dealing with what's really going on? Isn't that Fantasy?
The folks at DAW didn't seem to think so. They read it twice and
rejected
it finally because it "wasn't Fantasy enough". What do you all think?
S.A. Magnuson
sama...@interaccess.com (for the moment, I'm switching providers)
[I am posting this through Deja News because my current internet
provider
is a problem and keeps logging off whenever I try to post. Please
write
to me at the e-mail above or just post and I'll be able to read it
somehow. Thanks.]
-------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====-----------------------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet
Julian Flood
"Dennis L. McKiernan" <dl...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
> > But if a
> > publisher wants to publish what I think of as a historical novel as
> > fantasy or vice versa, I'm quite willing to oblige him or her. :-)
>
> Well said. :-)
There is a cost. I saw one writer talking about a historical novel he had
written where the publisher had said 'where's the fantasy?'
'It's historical, not fantasy'.
'Your readers expect magic'.
'OK. Put it out under another name'.
'Right, that makes you Mr New Writer. Our normal advance for new writers
is £x.
'Errm. How about if I put some magic in?'
'Hey, great idea. Advance £250x'.
But he still regretted it.
--
Julian Flood
jul...@argonet.co.uk
Life: much too important to be taken seriously.
Liz
In article <8732263...@dejanews.com>, suzanne....@cahners.com
writes
>The folks at DAW didn't seem to think so. They read it twice and
>rejected
>it finally because it "wasn't Fantasy enough". What do you all think?
I don't know whether there would be problems marketing it, but I do know
I think it sounds great. I really like work that deconstructs the
"givens" of a particular area, and I'd like to read this.
Liz
--
L...@gila.demon.co.uk
Editor, Odyssey; fiction editor, Valkyrie; chair, Milford Workshop
Odyssey Magazine home page - http://members.aol.com/bjeapes/odyssey
Milford pro sf writers' workshop - http://members.aol.com/bjeapes/milford
Daniel Hugh Nexon
On Tue, 2 Sep 1997 suzanne....@cahners.com wrote:
> They basically brainwash themselves into certain behaviors because they
> think they ought to behave that way. (i.e. I'm a big, brave knight, so I
> should slay dragons and rescue princesses. I'm the big, brave knight's
> sidekick, so I should be more loyal than a cocker spaniel, even if he's a
> big jerk, etc.) This is a very simplistic explanation of what I'm trying
> to do, here, but I think it gives a general idea at least. What I want
> to talk about is how culture brainwashes people into certain behavior,
> it's not something I've seen done in Fantasy before, and it's a very real
> phenomenon, just look at Chivalry, or modern gangs.
Interesting of course; though I wouldn't say that it hasn't been done in
fantasy before. However, I think your "brainwashing" metaphor is wrong.
Human beings are not "brainwashed" by culture: individuals are, from the
very instant of their creation, placed in social 'medium.' One cannot
speak of an essentially "non-brainwashed" individual who becomes
brainwashed.... sorry if that's unclear. If pressed, I will elucidate
further. I can suggest a large body of works in different areas of social
theory which might provide a guide. This is, after all, not all that
distinct from my desire to write a fantasy novel motivated by the common
understandings and lifeworld of the individuals--a fantasy lifeworld which
itself may or may not 'exist' as such, but itself produces the behavior
which confirms the common understandings of the individuals, e.g.
'prophecy' is fulfilled because people belive themselves to be in a
prophetic (I know I've misused this...) situation. Yet, of course, things
cannot unfold as individuals believe they will.....
> > The second thing I'm attempting is to look at personal power.
A problematic model.
> The folks at DAW didn't seem to think so. They read it twice and
> rejected
> it finally because it "wasn't Fantasy enough". What do you all think?
*I* think its potentially fantasy of the best kind; but from your
description it seems too blunt....
"[A]narchists... swallow without protest all the severe standards which
scientists and logicians impose upon research ... what are thought to be
the laws of scientific method by a particular writer... are even
integrated into anarchism itself." P. Feyerabend | www.columbia.edu/~dhn2
Rachael M. Lininger
On Tue, 2 Sep 1997 suzanne....@cahners.com wrote:
<snippage>
> It's been established that the book must have some Fantasy elements.
Not exactly. It's been established that the book needs "fantasy"
elements to sell to certain publishers--not quite the same thing.
There's very little magic in Kay's _Lions of Al-Rassan,_ for example.
That's Roc, I think. I'm pretty sure Tor has also done a good bit of
low-key fantasy, too. (Corrections, anyone?)
> I
> guess I just need a clearer definition of what they are. Obviously
> they can include ghosts, psychic phenomena and mythic beings, but what if
> all of these things are rationally explained by the book - just like they
> are in science fiction or in reality?
It's also the tone, or flavor, of the thing. Is it an explainable,
ordinary machine/alien/whatever? Or is it something marvelous and
awesome or just plain weird? And just because something can be
explained doesn't make it un-fantastic.
<snip very interesting stuff about her book>
I would really like to see this, in part because I like doing similar
things. Turning people's expectations around can be fun. However, if
six different people here wrote that book it'd come out in six very
very different ways--notion is not execution--so I wouldn't venture to
judge.
> Isn't that Fantasy?
>
> The folks at DAW didn't seem to think so. They read it twice and
> rejected it finally because it "wasn't Fantasy enough". What do
> you all think?
I couldn't say without seeing it, though I'm leaning towards "yeah,
sure." It very definitely could be fantasy; I'm not entirely sure how
it could _not_ be. But all things are possible.
As for what I think--I think that's just one publisher. If you got
through a second reading, and they rejected it for only that reason,
I'd say send it to someone else who does do the low-key fantasy stuff
(for want of a better term, or even any term at all). Or try a
"mainstream" imprint, just for kicks (betcha they give it back for
being fantasy, though).
Every editor has different tastes. Every list has different needs,
which as far as I know change seasonally. I don't think you should try
to shove in "magical" elements where you don't think they fit; wait
for an editor to tell you to do that--and make him convince you first.
Or give you money. :)
> S.A. Magnuson
> sama...@interaccess.com (for the moment, I'm switching providers)
Good luck!
Rachael
Rachael M. Lininger
lini...@virtu.sar.usf.edu
SForzando: The New College Magazine of Speculative Fiction
http://www.sar.usf.edu/~sfz
Dennis L. McKiernan
By the way, I wanted to add to this subject of magic ...
There are tales where powerful magic seems to be done by everyone ...
But I believe that in such a world where everything is possible,
nothing is very interesting. That is, if large diamonds were as
plentiful as grains of sand, they wouldn't hold any value.
---Dennis
Dan Goodman
In article <5uin1f$c...@bgtnsc02.worldnet.att.net>,
> There are tales where powerful magic seems to be done by everyone ...
> But I believe that in such a world where everything is possible,
>nothing is very interesting. That is, if large diamonds were as
>plentiful as grains of sand, they wouldn't hold any value.
And -- in a world where everyone can do magic we would consider powerful,
two kinds of people might have prized skills:
The ones who can do _really_ powerful magic, not puny stuff like
destroying one of the moons and making everyone remember falsely that
there's always been only one moon.
The ones who have "negative" magic -- magic doesn't work on them, or
around them.
I believe all of these have been used, several times each, in published
sf.
Maureen Goldman
Your book sounds interesting.
Perhaps you're just looking for acceptance in all the wrong places.
--
Maureen Goldman
To reply, please remove fog.
WooF
On Tue, 2 Sep 1997, Dennis L. McKiernan wrote:
> By the way, I wanted to add to this subject of magic ...
> There are tales where powerful magic seems to be done by everyone ...
> But I believe that in such a world where everything is possible,
> nothing is very interesting. That is, if large diamonds were as
> plentiful as grains of sand, they wouldn't hold any value.
> ---Dennis
A neat paraphrase of H.G. Wells's remark about science fiction.
G the Scithers
owls...@netaxs.com
Magnus Olsson
In article <8732263...@dejanews.com>,
<suzanne....@cahners.com> wrote:
>It's been established that the book must have some Fantasy elements. I
>guess I just need a clearer definition of what they are. Obviously
>they can include ghosts, psychic phenomena and mythic beings, but what if
>all of these things are rationally explained by the book - just like they
>are in science fiction or in reality?
Well, IMHO if they are explained just as in reality (i.e. the ghost turns out to
be some criminal posing as a ghost, as in a Scooby Doo cartoon), then the genre
isn't fantasy but suspense, or crime, or something else.
If it's rationally explained like in science fiction, then your book
may be science fiction, but it may also be fantasy. Sounds strange? I
don't know, but there are fantasy books where magic is just as
rational as physics, and it still has that "fantasy feeling" to
it. But if the supernatural things were explained entirely in terms of
(extrapolated) science-as-we-know-it, then I'd say it's science
fiction.
This was actually a digression. :-)
On to the question I really wanted to ask: Suppose your story
contains, say, ghosts or psychic phenomena, and that these phenomena
aren't rationally explained - the ghost really *is* your
great-great-great-grandaunt, and there is no new kind of physics (such
as a time loop) that can explain her manifesting herself in your bedroom.
Suppose this is true. Does this make the story fantasy? Or does it place
it in the "occult" genre?
And what, really, *is* the difference between "fantasy" and "occult"?
I've been wondering about this since I saw MZB's submission guidelines
that said that she was looking for fantasy, not occult stories.
I think I can tell the difference between an "occult" ghost story and
a "fantasy" ghost story if I read them. But that's not the same thing
as being to define the difference.
Can anybody help?
--
Magnus Olsson (m...@df.lth.se, zeb...@pobox.com)
------ http://www.pobox.com/~zebulon ------
Not officially connected to LU or LTH.
John Benson
m...@bartlet.df.lth.se (Magnus Olsson) writes (in part):
>This was actually a digression. :-)
>On to the question I really wanted to ask: Suppose your story
>contains, say, ghosts or psychic phenomena, and that these phenomena
>aren't rationally explained - the ghost really *is* your
>great-great-great-grandaunt, and there is no new kind of physics (such
>as a time loop) that can explain her manifesting herself in your bedroom.
>Suppose this is true. Does this make the story fantasy? Or does it place
>it in the "occult" genre?
>And what, really, *is* the difference between "fantasy" and "occult"?
>I've been wondering about this since I saw MZB's submission guidelines
>that said that she was looking for fantasy, not occult stories.
>I think I can tell the difference between an "occult" ghost story and
>a "fantasy" ghost story if I read them. But that's not the same thing
>as being to define the difference.
>Can anybody help?
>--
>Magnus Olsson (m...@df.lth.se, zeb...@pobox.com)
This one may be harder to answer than it seems. There are
some obvious boundaries. For example, if the setting is clearly
not our world past or present, then it's fantasy. But what if
we are in our world? Now it gets harder. MZB's own Witch Hill
might be occult. But De Lint or Peter S. Beagle are pretty obviously
fantasy. Is it the degree to which belief must be suspended?
Is it general tone?
Maybe the only real difference is audience. A distinction
which might make more sense to marketers than to critics.
suzanne....@cahners.com
Thanks to all for the encouragement about the initial idea, but what can I
do to present this to publishers in the correct light? I think that's
what all of us who are attempting this fantasy/realism, or whatever we
want to call it, really need to know.
I mean, I wouldn't have written this extremely lengthy book if the idea
didn't entertain me. I just want the opportunity now to allow it to
entertain - or anger - other people. I got into this genre in the first
place because it seemed to allow a writer the most freedom to write
different stuff and still get published. This was, of course, after
reading it my whole life and adoring it, but I could have chosen any
genre, really. It sort of scares me to see all these rather arbitrary
rules being imposed on - speculative fiction. Sort of cuts down on the
speculative part, doesn't it?
What I'm really in need of, here, is a game plan. I want to try to find
the correct angle to approach a publisher with, that will allow me the
greatest possiblity of success. I need more heads than my own to help me,
so I'm basically using all of you in an extremely cynical fashion to find
a way to promote my book :) And I even used an evil emoticon so you'd
realize I was joking. I think we can all help each other, here, and isn't
that what this newsgroup is all about? There seem to be several of us
with this same problem.
Liz, you said it sounded interesting, how would you pitch something of
this nature to yourself or another publisher?
As you can see, I have a practical bent, and it shows up in the writing as
well.
Thanks,
S.
Russell Asplund
> In article <5uin1f$c...@bgtnsc02.worldnet.att.net>,
> Dennis L. McKiernan <dl...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
> >By the way, I wanted to add to this subject of magic ...
> > There are tales where powerful magic seems to be done by everyone ...
> > But I believe that in such a world where everything is possible,
> >nothing is very interesting. That is, if large diamonds were as
> >plentiful as grains of sand, they wouldn't hold any value.
>
> But whatever _was_ rare might be valuable.
>
> And -- in a world where everyone can do magic we would consider powerful,
> two kinds of people might have prized skills:
>
> The ones who can do _really_ powerful magic, not puny stuff like
> destroying one of the moons and making everyone remember falsely that
> there's always been only one moon.
>
> The ones who have "negative" magic -- magic doesn't work on them, or
> around them.
>
> I believe all of these have been used, several times each, in published
> sf.
One of my favorites is a short story by Joanna Russ, called, I think, "The
Man Who Could Not See Demons."
--
Russell William Asplund
ru...@candesa.com
Liz
In article <8733129...@dejanews.com>, suzanne....@cahners.com
writes
>Liz, you said it sounded interesting, how would you pitch something of
>this nature to yourself or another publisher?
Umm... well, this is going to be less than helpful, but I wouldn't pitch
it to me, because I edit a magazine and it's a book (unless I've been
severely deluded, anyway). If I had such a book to pitch... I'd leave
pitching it to my agent - it's his job to know who's buying what.
Sorry. I did say this was going to be less than helpful. I think all
you can do is get the best market information you can (asking here is a
good start), write the best and most honest synopsis you can, make sure
the book - especially but not only the first three chapters - is the
best it can be, and then send it off. And let it sell itself. That's
really all any of us can do (with or without agent).
Gary Farber
In <8732263...@dejanews.com> suzanne....@cahners.com wrote:
[. . .]
: It's been established that the book must have some Fantasy elements. I
: guess I just need a clearer definition of what they are. Obviously
: they can include ghosts, psychic phenomena and mythic beings, but what if
: all of these things are rationally explained by the book - just like they
: are in science fiction or in reality?
Try Susan Palwick's lovely "Floating in Place."
[. . . .]
--
--
Copyright 1997 by Gary Farber; Experienced Web Researcher; Nonfiction
Writing, Fiction and Nonfiction Editing Done; gfa...@panix.com; NYC
Graydon
In article <5uipnu$k...@panix2.panix.com>,
Gary Farber <gfa...@panix.com> wrote:
>In <Pine.GSO.3.96.970902174455.28894B-100000@virtu>
>Rachael M. Lininger <lini...@virtu.sar.usf.edu> wrote:
>[. . .]
>: I'm pretty sure Tor has also done a good bit of
>: low-key fantasy, too. (Corrections, anyone?)
>
It is in fact much better to read :Freedom and Necessity: from a strict,
strict materialist perspective, it makes a whole lot more sense that way.
MariKatze
>>And what, really, *is* the difference between "fantasy" and "occult"?
>>I've been wondering about this since I saw MZB's submission guidelines
>>that said that she was looking for fantasy, not occult stories.
A fantasy story is one that she buys. "An occult story" is what she
writes on the rejection letter. ;)
Mari
-------------------------------------------
I always wanted to be somebody,
but I should have been more specific.
-- Lily Tomlin
-------------------------------------------
Tara K. Harper
On 3 Sep 1997 17:40:29 GMT, jo...@ssec.wisc.edu (John Benson) wrote:
> This one may be harder to answer than it seems. There are
> some obvious boundaries. For example, if the setting is clearly
> not our world past or present, then it's fantasy. But what if
> we are in our world? Now it gets harder. MZB's own Witch Hill
> might be occult. But De Lint or Peter S. Beagle are pretty obviously
> fantasy. Is it the degree to which belief must be suspended?
> Is it general tone?
Peter S. Beagle's _A Fine and Private Place_ is occult,
not fantasy. His novel, _The Last Unicorn_, is fantasy,
not occult.
Regards,
tkh
--
Tara K. Harper
PO Box 23-0107; Tigard, OR 97281-0107
URL: http://www.teleport.com/~until/tkh.htm
e-mail: until@nojunk_teleport.com
To Reply: remove "nojunk_" from domain name
Ed Gaillard
In article <5ulap9$a...@panix2.panix.com>,
Gary Farber <gfa...@panix.com> wrote:
>In <8732263...@dejanews.com> suzanne....@cahners.com wrote:
>[. . .]
>
>: It's been established that the book must have some Fantasy elements. I
>: guess I just need a clearer definition of what they are. Obviously
>: they can include ghosts, psychic phenomena and mythic beings, but what if
>: all of these things are rationally explained by the book - just like they
>: are in science fiction or in reality?
>
>Try Susan Palwick's lovely "Floating in Place."
The title's actually "Flying in Place". A fine book, beautifully
written; I second Gary's recommendation, though I don't think that
*everything* was rationally explained in it. Perhaps I should reread
it, with specific attention to that.
-ed g.
--
Ed Gaillard <gail...@panix.com>
http://www.panix.com/~gaillard/
Gary Farber
In <5umflt$o...@panix.com> Ed Gaillard <gail...@panix.com> wrote:
[. . .]
: >Try Susan Palwick's lovely "Floating in Place."
: The title's actually "Flying in Place".
Right, thanks; my copy isn't handy, and I read it in manuscript when it
had another title altogether (and, hey, I got the Literary Guild to buy
it).
: A fine book, beautifully
: written; I second Gary's recommendation, though I don't think that
: *everything* was rationally explained in it. Perhaps I should reread
: it, with specific attention to that.
No, I wasn't clear: it's more or less left ambiguous, up to the
interpretation of the reader; there's one crucial scene that is arguably
not ambiguous, but as "requiring a fantastic element" in a novel goes,
this is pretty darn minimalist, and thus it's an example of a publisher
(Tor) not worrying about "how much magic" is in it, or whether it is
"occult" or "fantasy" or any other damn label.
Michelle Bottorff
Magnus Olsson <m...@bartlet.df.lth.se> wrote:
> And what, really, *is* the difference between "fantasy" and "occult"?
> I've been wondering about this since I saw MZB's submission guidelines
> that said that she was looking for fantasy, not occult stories.
I think the difference is the presence of a significant body of
people/readers who would believe in the 'fantastic' elements used.
A LOT of people believe in ghosts, second sight, divine intervention,
etc. These are regarded as occult *as well as* fantasy.
Hardly anybody believes in wizards who can make magic wands spew
fireballs, or that there are winged fire-breathing dragons living
invisibly in central park.
This are considered fantasy, but not occult.
Make sense?
If you want to write a fantasy, but NOT occult story featuring fantastic
elements that might be considered occult, it can be helpful to set them
on a different world. This way you can get the 'feel' of using those
elements while still maintaining a separation from this world's belief
systems.
Michelle
WooF
O Suzanne:
Your basic question **seems* to be how do you plug the story in the cover
letter that goes with the customary 10,000 words plus outline plus
return envelope.
The cold truth of the matter is: you don't. Put just enough in the cover
letter so the editor to whom you've sent the package knows who you are
(don't forget your return address on letter, on title page, and on first
page of outline), whether you have relevant writing-&-acceptance
experience (list no more than -- say three -- previous publications), and
describe the story (without mentioning how good or bad it is) just enough
so that whoever first looks at the letter can route it to the appropriate
editor.
Editors don't buy cover letters. Editors do not respond to efforts to
"sell" them the book. Editors need (1) to have the manuscript-handling
system route the manuscript to them, and (2) to read the first few
pages of that 10,000 words. **You* need to make those first few pages good
enough that the editor (and eventually the book buyer) will read the rest
of those 10,000 wrods, and will want to read further.
So: make your one-page cover letter short and simple, and then get
out of the way so the editor can see the only thing that will sell your
manuscript, to wit: your manuscript.
George Scithers
owls...@netaxs.com
Chad Ryan Thomas
>What I want
>to talk about is how culture brainwashes people into certain behavior,
What you're talking about is called "socialization" or "enculturation" by
anthropologists. (And which one any particular scholar uses is largely a
matter of personal preference.) It happens in the first few years of life,
when a child is still learning the "proper" way to act, and it's not so much
brainwashing as it is a learning process that favors certain forms over
others.
For example, Chinese aren't "brainwashed" into revering paternal ancestors,
its just that everything they've ever known tells them that such reverence is
"good" and "proper". Having never really encountered any other way of
thinking, John Q. Chinese-Peasant is going to revere granddad.
Now, from the rest of your description of the storyline (and please, correct
me with righteous anger if I misinterpret), it sounds to me like what you're
exploring isn't deluded, brainwashed characters, but characters in a
situation that challenges conventional cultural norms. Put that way,
virtually every really interesting book in Western Literature is comparable
to a greater or lesser degree.
But to make my point (Yes, I suppose I DO have a point here somewhere...),
don't assume this process is a negative one. "Brainwashing" has some pretty
nasty connotions that the process of socialization usually doesn't involve.
>but I think having a highly
>realistic book set in that familiar setting where everyone is
>expecting someone like Gandalf to pop up at any minute ...
I don't think this is an accurate representation of what most high fantasy
worlds would really have been like. Maybe it's accurate of how they've been
*represented* in the literature, but think about it for a moment.
You've got an entire world, usually with a roughly Medieval technology and
economy. That means the vast majority of people are going to be farmers, and
of those a good majority will never travel very far from home. From my
experience, very few high fantasy books really posit that a great number of
people have extensive magic of the Gandalf-type. The odds of any one farmer
ever actually meeting a wizard would be really low.
In fact, probably about as low as the odds of any Medieval serf in the real
world meeting a wizard.
Than again, maybe I'm reading WAY too much into a passing comment.
--
****** Chad Ryan Thomas ******** crth...@indiana.edu *****
/ "I have learned, in whatsoever state I am, therewith to be\
\ content." -- St. Paul (Phil. 4:11, KJV) /
********* http://ezinfo.ucs.indiana.edu/~crthomas *********
Dorothy J Heydt
In article <5uonbq$g...@news1.panix.com>,
P Nielsen Hayden <p...@panix.com> wrote:
>The descent of the Holy Spirit is not
>brought on by accumulating enough hit points.
I love this line. It ranks right up there with Williams's
"Sometimes the altar must be built in one place that the fire
from heaven may descend in another."
But when I read it to my husband, he just said, "Of course not.
It's brought on by accumulating enough mana." He's an engineer.
Dorothy J. Heydt
Albany, California
djheydt@uclink
(My account might go away at any moment; if I disappear, I haven't died.)
Stephen Dedman
Liz <L...@gila.demon.co.uk> writes:
>In article <340e1f9b....@news.teleport.com>, "Tara K. Harper"
><until@dontsendjunk_teleport.com> writes
>>On 3 Sep 1997 17:40:29 GMT, jo...@ssec.wisc.edu (John Benson) wrote:
>>
>>
>>> This one may be harder to answer than it seems. There are
>>> some obvious boundaries. For example, if the setting is clearly
>>> not our world past or present, then it's fantasy. But what if
>>> we are in our world? Now it gets harder. MZB's own Witch Hill
>>> might be occult. But De Lint or Peter S. Beagle are pretty obviously
>>> fantasy. Is it the degree to which belief must be suspended?
>>> Is it general tone?
>>
>>
>>Peter S. Beagle's _A Fine and Private Place_ is occult,
>Hmmm. I can see why you'd say that, and strictly speaking you're right.
>But I've always thought of it as fantasy. Goes to tone, I think.
>Liz
Now for a really tough one; Dan Simmons's _Song of Kali_. Horrific,
certainly, but is it occult? Fantasy? Or mainstream?
- Stephen Dedman
Graydon
>>I would have said that an occult story is one that assumes the workings of
>>magic are inherently unknowable, and that a fantasy story assumes that the
>>magic has knowable rules at the very least.
>
>The THE LORD OF THE RINGS is an occult story, since one of the recurrent moral
>points made is that no one in the mortal world can completely understand or
>predict the workings-out of the divine.
That assumes that the divine will is 'magic'; I think it reasonably clear
from the text that this is not the case.
There's the Divine Will, Providence, if-chance-you-call-it; there's the
deiurgic power of the various Valar and Maiar; there's the stuff the Elves
do which is related to, but a lesser form, of that; there's the sorcerous,
technological magic that's done by some Elves and various other folks like
orcs and Sauron, his servants, and Saruman; and then there's natural
powers like the stuff the ents do.
All of those but the first two can be called magic; it's fairly clear that
all of them have knowable rules - Elves can get consistent results when
making glowing gemstones, Sauron and his servants consistently dominanate
wills and Morgul knives work reliably, Treebeard can make calculations
about how fast Ents can ecavate through earth and stone.
>The idea that "magic should have knowable rules" is very appealing to a
>certain SF-oriented mentality, one that I share myself, but it really forms
>only a subset of fantasy. Is the magic in LITTLE, BIG a matter of "knowable
>rules"? Not at all. As in Tolkien, the whole point is that the miraculous
>is, well, miraculous. Eucatastrophe. The descent of the Holy Spirit is not
>brought on by accumulating enough hit points.
Sure, but neither is Eucatastrophe magical, unless 'magical' and
a particular construction of 'supernatural' are deemed synonyms. (Which
would certainly peeve Old Prof Tolkien on the basis of "On Fairy Stories"
and his letters about magic.)
Dennis L. McKiernan
It seems that occasionally there crops up discussions about the line
between fantasy and science fiction, why some books are one and some are
another, how horror and dark fantasy and other such genres fit in, and
so on and on.
I addressed this subject in various conventions, and was asked to do an
article on it (which appeared in the SFWA Bulletin). Inasmuch as there
has been of late some discussion on this subject in this newsgroup,
perhaps a relevant part of that artricle might be of interest here. So
...
... Let me tell you how I see fantasy and science fiction and in fact
any genre you want to name:
Imagine you are in a great mountain range: in fact, you are in the Genre
Peaks of the Metaphor Mountains of the Literary Range. That peak over
there, the one with the launch pad way up on top and mission control and
the big sweeping searchlights and the rocket, that's pure science, and
stories written way up there are hard science fiction stories.
Now this other peak over here, the one with the castle on top and the
perched dragon and the purple flashes of aural light, that's pure magic,
and the stories written up there are high fantasy.
This peak back here, the one with the ramshackle house and the bats and
the full moon, that's the pure horror peak.
And I'm sure you will notice that there's a western peak and a mystery
peak and an thriller peak and a peak for any sort of genre you care to
name. But for the moment let's concentrate on just two of those
mountains: the science fiction peak and the fantasy peak.
If you start right at the top of the science-fiction peak, where e=mc²,
where Einstein rules, you are in the place of hard science, where you
will discover that the only science fiction you can write at that
altitude simply has to follow known scientific law . . . period!
But if you begin to walk down that mountain and head in the general
direction of the fantasy peak, the scenery about you begins to change.
The laws of science begin to become a bit rubbery, and as you continue
on down the slope, you run across things which begin to be contrary to
pure known science . . . things such as faster-than-light drives,
transporters, instant interstellar communications, and so on.
If you continue going on down the science-fiction slope, continue
heading toward the fantasy mountain, the landscape continues to become
stranger and stranger, littered with time machines and universal
translators and genetically engineered horses that can fly and such.
Continuing on, you find telepathy, telekinesis, teleportation, The
Force, and other psi powers, and the X-men and Superman and Wonder
Woman, and so on.
By now you are deep in the valley between science fiction and fantasy,
where you can't tell the difference twixt the two, where it's either a
science-fiction/fantasy tale, or a fantasy/science-fiction one.
But as you start up the fantasy mountain, toward that castle on the
peak, the one with the purple light and dragon, the landscape continues
to alter the higher you go. There are less and less technological
marvels, and there are more and more things of wonder ... though many of
them seem to be but alterations of things we've seen an analogue of on
the other peak . . . like, for instance, instead of a genetically
engineered horse with wings, we discover a living, breathing, natural
Pegasus. We discover that instead of mental telepathy, there's a woman
who can cast a spell and read your mind. And instead of someone who is
pyrokinetic, there's a guy who can blast a firebolt from the palm of his
hand. And instead of someone who can teleport, there's a wizard who can
disappear from here and reappear there.
But you know, perhaps I've got things backwards. Perhaps many of the
things on the science-fiction mountain are but analogues of those on the
fantasy mountain. After all, Pegasus came well before genetic
engineering . . . and spell-casting was in full bloom before psi came
along. . . .
In any event, as we go on we finally get to the very pinnacle of
fantasy, where instead of pure science, we find pure magic.
But standing anywhere else but upon the very top of a given peak, we
will see that the slope is filled with subtle alterations, is changing
toward whatever other peak or peaks we happen to be facing.
This phenomena of slowly shifting landscape is not confined only to
science fiction and fantasy: we can walk, for example, from the western
peak (the one with the cowboys and stampeding herd and the gunfight at
high noon) toward that part of the romance peak where the bodice-rippers
are (where the Topaz Man or Fabio are in a clinch with a lissome beauty)
and watch the landscape change as we stroll from here to there. Or we
can go from horror toward science fiction, encountering first Dracula
and then later on, as we continue to walk toward science fiction, the
Frankenstein monster. Or we can follow a winding trail that twists and
turns among several peaks, and get a multi-genre tale.
So what is the difference between science fiction and fantasy, or for
that matter between any two genres or among several? Well, it all
depends on how you got to where you stand.
The main thing is: did you enjoy the trip?
WooF
O Dennis & r.a.sf.c:
Bear in mind that the most famous time travel story of all is pure fantasy
-- and the second most famous time travel is (with respect to scientific
knowledge at the time it was written) pure science fiction.
The second most famous is, of course, H.G. Wells's "The Time Machine."
The most famous? Come **on* now -- it's about sixty years older than "The
Time Machine," which itself is about a century old -- I refer, of course,
to "A Christmas Carol" . . . and citing those two is a lovely way to
explain the difference (on one level, at least) between fantasy and
science fiction.
L Sprague de Camp pointed out that there are two kinds of definitions: one
draws a line around the subject (or between two subjects: the bottoms of
your valleys, for example); the other points to the center of the subject
(your mountain peaks).
And you realize, of course, that these peaks are embedded in something
other than our own three-dimensional space, since almost any two peaks
can have a common border -- which isn't quite possible in **our* universe.
And -- somehow adjacent to the Romance peak is the one where Topaz Man and
Fabio are locked in a close, romantic [insert a noun of your choice] . . .
but you get the idea.
Geo the Scithers
owls...@netaxs.com
Ray Radlein
WooF wrote:
>
> And -- somehow adjacent to the Romance peak is the one where Topaz
> Man and Fabio are locked in a close, romantic [insert a noun of your
> choice] . . .
"Nostril."
- Ray R.
--
*********************************************************************
"Well, before my sword can pass all the way through your neck, it has
to pass *half way* through your neck. But before it can do *that*, it
has to first pass *one-fourth* of the way through your neck. And
before it can do *that*...." - Zeno, Warrior Princess
Ray Radlein - r...@learnlink.emory.edu
homepage coming soon! wooo, wooo.
*********************************************************************
Dennis L. McKiernan
WooF wrote:
> And you realize, of course, that these peaks are embedded in something
> other than our own three-dimensional space, since almost any two peaks
> can have a common border -- which isn't quite possible in **our* universe.
Arrange the peaks 'round the perimeter of a circle (or oval, square,
rectangle, polygon, etc). The bland centerpoint represents the common
ground among any two genres, or three, more, and/or all. (But in truth,
I rather like to teleport [or use magic] to get from a place on the
slope of one peak to a slope on another.)
---Dennis
Marks Robert B
Dennis, I think that your metaphor there is the best way of putting it I
have ever seen (can I use it in my next article? :-) ).
Robert Marks
--
The future has not been written, / The past is set in stone,
And I am but a lonely wanderer, / With time as my only home.
-- from _Demon's Vengeance_
Gary Farber
In <5up8oi$4...@agate.berkeley.edu> Dorothy J Heydt
: I wouldn't be surprised if the distinction between fantasy and
: occult, as judged at MZBFM, is similarly subjective. Remember
: Damon Knight's famous definition? "Science fiction is whatever I
: point at and say 'science fiction.'"
Standard correction to this standard misquoting of Damon Knight: it's
"'science fiction' is whatever *we* point at when *we* talk about science
fiction." (Emphasis mine.) The crucial distinction being that we must
already be agreed upon the sfness of what we are discussing: this is not
an authoritarian dictate.
[. . . .]
Marks Robert B
Dennis L. McKiernan (dl...@worldnet.att.net) wrote:
:
: > And you realize, of course, that these peaks are embedded in something
: > other than our own three-dimensional space, since almost any two peaks
: > can have a common border -- which isn't quite possible in **our* universe.
:
: Arrange the peaks 'round the perimeter of a circle (or oval, square,
: rectangle, polygon, etc). The bland centerpoint represents the common
: ground among any two genres, or three, more, and/or all. (But in truth,
: I rather like to teleport [or use magic] to get from a place on the
: slope of one peak to a slope on another.)
: ---Dennis
You know, it's much more fun to fly Dragon...
Mind you, it does help if the Dragon is either tamed or likes you...
Dorothy J Heydt
In article <5v0i3b$7...@panix2.panix.com>,
Gary Farber <gfa...@panix.com> wrote:
>Standard correction to this standard misquoting of Damon Knight: it's
>"'science fiction' is whatever *we* point at when *we* talk about science
>fiction." (Emphasis mine.) The crucial distinction being that we must
>already be agreed upon the sfness of what we are discussing: this is not
>an authoritarian dictate.
OK, I'll keep that in mind. (Or, as Mrs. Beeton might have put
it, "First catch your consensus....")
PMccutc103
until@dontsendjunk_teleport.com (Tara K. Harper) wrote:
>Peter S. Beagle's _A Fine and Private Place_ is occult,
>not fantasy. His novel, _The Last Unicorn_, is fantasy,
>not occult.
Is there some reason to care about this distinction?
________________________
Pete McCutchen
Liz
In article <19970910143...@ladder02.news.aol.com>, PMccutc103
<pmccu...@aol.com> writes
>until@dontsendjunk_teleport.com (Tara K. Harper) wrote:
>
>
>>Peter S. Beagle's _A Fine and Private Place_ is occult,
>>not fantasy. His novel, _The Last Unicorn_, is fantasy,
>>not occult.
>
>Is there some reason to care about this distinction?
Marketing.
Liz
Gary Farber
In <tTJUoHAZ...@gila.demon.co.uk> Liz <L...@gila.demon.co.uk> wrote:
: In article <19970910143...@ladder02.news.aol.com>, PMccutc103
: <pmccu...@aol.com> writes
: >until@dontsendjunk_teleport.com (Tara K. Harper) wrote:
: >
: >>Peter S. Beagle's _A Fine and Private Place_ is occult,
: >>not fantasy. His novel, _The Last Unicorn_, is fantasy,
: >>not occult.
: >
: >Is there some reason to care about this distinction?
: Marketing.
Despite the fact that I'm not sure that's what Tara had in mind, and that
I've made similar responses in the past, I'll point out that "marketing"
is not necessarily a dirty word (I'm not implying you think it is, either,
Liz: I'm just making conversation). "Marketing" may also be simply looked
upon as another word for "helping writing find its audience."
This is a *good* thing.
--
--
Copyright 1997 by Gary Farber; Experienced Web Researcher; Nonfiction
Writer, Fiction and Nonfiction Editor; gfa...@panix.com; B'klyn, NYC
PMccutc103
gfa...@panix.com (Gary Farber) wrote:
>: >Is there some reason to care about this distinction?
>
>: Marketing.
>
>Despite the fact that I'm not sure that's what Tara had in mind, and that
>I've made similar responses in the past, I'll point out that "marketing"
>is not necessarily a dirty word (I'm not implying you think it is, either,
>Liz: I'm just making conversation). "Marketing" may also be simply looked
>upon as another word for "helping writing find its audience."
>
>This is a *good* thing.
Sure, sure. It's a good thing to help writing find its audience. But I'm
not an expert on marketing, and I have little desire to become an expert on
marketing. What I do want to become an expert on is writing. So what
I'll do is write the best stories I can, and I'll let people like Liz and
Patrick and even you Gary decide whether and how to market the result.
(Actually, at this stage I'm more interested in the "whether" than the "how.")
So if Patrick decides my book is "occult" rather than "fantasy," fine.
I guess that I could have been more artiful in my question: is there some
reason for me, a putative writer, to care about this distinction?
________________________
Pete McCutchen
Liz
In article <19970911025...@ladder01.news.aol.com>, PMccutc103
<pmccu...@aol.com> writes
I guess I shouldn't have thought the one word answer would do. <sigh>
Marketing: you need to understand the best place to send your manuscript
so that it will fit that publisher's/magazine's needs. Otherwise,
you're just wasting your time and theirs.
Fred Welden
In article <5urpe0$j...@bgtnsc02.worldnet.att.net> Dennis L. McKiernan (dl...@worldnet.att.net) wrote:
[in part]
> ... Let me tell you how I see fantasy and science fiction and in fact
> any genre you want to name:
> Imagine you are in a great mountain range: in fact, you are in the Genre
> Peaks of the Metaphor Mountains of the Literary Range. That peak over
> there, the one with the launch pad way up on top and mission control and
> the big sweeping searchlights and the rocket, that's pure science, and
> stories written way up there are hard science fiction stories.
> Now this other peak over here, the one with the castle on top and the
> perched dragon and the purple flashes of aural light, that's pure magic,
> and the stories written up there are high fantasy.
> This peak back here, the one with the ramshackle house and the bats and
> the full moon, that's the pure horror peak.
[etc, in a very nice metaphor]
But you left out a description of what happens if you teleport from the
high slopes of SF Mountain to the Cliffs of Fantasy, and then cast a
spell to return, without travelling through the valley between at all.
[Answer: either you do it as parody or you don't get published, as far
as I can tell. I'd be happy to be disillusioned, though.]
Also, it seems to me that the denizens of Western Heights have put up an
awful lot of barbed wire around the high meadows--below there, though
you may be far from the valley beneath SF Mountain, you will still be
called SF, and likewise Romance, etc. Their hearts are still pure, up
there in the Heights.
--Fred | wel...@ntrnet.net http://www.ntrnet.net/~welden (mod. 06Aug97)
| Real Dobonians don't eat kippered pugmoose.
Fred Welden
In article <19970911025...@ladder01.news.aol.com> PMccutc103 (pmccu...@aol.com) wrote:
> Sure, sure. It's a good thing to help writing find its audience. But I'm
> not an expert on marketing, and I have little desire to become an expert on
> marketing. What I do want to become an expert on is writing. So what
> I'll do is write the best stories I can, and I'll let people like Liz and
> Patrick and even you Gary decide whether and how to market the result.
> (Actually, at this stage I'm more interested in the "whether" than the "how.")
> So if Patrick decides my book is "occult" rather than "fantasy," fine.
> I guess that I could have been more artiful in my question: is there some
> reason for me, a putative writer, to care about this distinction?
Unfortunately, yes. Put it this way: you write your best manuscript
ever. You don't know or care if it will be labeled "occult" or
"fantasy." That's fine. But now, where do you send it? How do you
even find an agent who will know where to send it?
More unfortunately, in my opinion, there is a broad and fuzzy border
between writing the novel and then deciding how to sell it, and setting
out to write a specific sort of saleable novel in the first place. I
get a little twinge when I'm writing and the thought "Maybe I better not
do this here, 'cause if I do where the hell am I going to send this
puppy when I'm done with it?" even starts to percolate into conscious
consideration. But as I say, it's a broad and fuzzy border, and I
suspect I've taken up residence rather far from the middle of it. The
further you are out in the fuzz, the more you should care about these
distinctions.
--Fred | wel...@ntrnet.net http://www.ntrnet.net/~welden (mod. 06Aug97)
| In Dobonia we say "Every beer is like a poem, and every poem
| like a beer. Like a beer?"
PMccutc103
wel...@ns1.ntrnet.net (Fred Welden) wrote:
>But you left out a description of what happens if you teleport from the
>high slopes of SF Mountain to the Cliffs of Fantasy, and then cast a
>spell to return, without travelling through the valley between at all.
>[Answer: either you do it as parody or you don't get published, as far
>as I can tell. I'd be happy to be disillusioned, though.]
Pern?
________________________
Pete McCutchen
PWrede6492
In article <5v929f$919$0...@206.66.160.2>, wel...@ns1.ntrnet.net (Fred
Welden) writes:
>In article <19970911025...@ladder01.news.aol.com> PMccutc103
>(pmccu...@aol.com) wrote:
>> I guess that I could have been more artiful in my question: is there some
>> reason for me, a putative writer, to care about this distinction?
>
>Unfortunately, yes. Put it this way: you write your best manuscript
>ever. You don't know or care if it will be labeled "occult" or
>"fantasy." That's fine. But now, where do you send it? How do you
>even find an agent who will know where to send it?
You look at the manuscript you have written, and you look
at the books on your bookshelf that have similarities of tone,
voice, subject matter, etc. You write down the names of the
publishers who published those books. And you send it to them.
If you wish to do more research than that, you can settle in for
a couple of hours at the library with one or more of the "X..Writer's
Market" volumes, followed by a bit of conversation with your
local bookseller and/or any friends you may have who write.
If you are really determined, you go to SF conventions that
draw editors and agents, and listen to the advice they give on
panels (and maybe buy one or two dinner or a drink).
Figuring out where to send something is not that hard, if
one is halfway paying attention.
>More unfortunately, in my opinion, there is a broad and fuzzy border
>between writing the novel and then deciding how to sell it, and setting
>out to write a specific sort of saleable novel in the first place.
I wouldn't call it a broad fuzzy border. I'd call it a gap resembling
the Grand Canyon. But perhaps it's foggy on your side.
>I get a little twinge when I'm writing and the thought "Maybe I better not
>do this here, 'cause if I do where the hell am I going to send this
>puppy when I'm done with it?" even starts to percolate into conscious
>consideration.
It sounds as if you have far more confidence in your skills as
regards market analysis than you do in your skills as regards
creation and composition. Or am I misunderstanding what
you are attempting to say?
Patricia C. Wrede
Graydon
In article <5va4vj$1...@news1.panix.com>,>I agree that it's a fine thing for writers to look at marketing and packaging
>and what works and who does what. But it's also a fine thing to toss all that
>aside and write brilliant books that come from the heart. The first is a good
>thing to be able to do. The second is essential.
At the risk of rendering the answer useless, what does one put on the
cover letter when one wishes to tell the editor 'I have no idea in the
world what the appropriate marketing category for this story is, despite
having thought about it at length?'
P Nielsen Hayden
In article <hBH3MIAh...@gila.demon.co.uk>, Liz <L...@gila.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
>In article <19970911025...@ladder01.news.aol.com>, PMccutc103
><pmccu...@aol.com> writes
>>So if Patrick decides my book is "occult" rather than "fantasy," fine.
>>
>>I guess that I could have been more artiful in my question: is there some
>>reason for me, a putative writer, to care about this distinction?
>>________________________
>>
>>Pete McCutchen
>
>I guess I shouldn't have thought the one word answer would do. <sigh>
>Marketing: you need to understand the best place to send your manuscript
>so that it will fit that publisher's/magazine's needs. Otherwise,
>you're just wasting your time and theirs.
>
>Liz
But the problem is, the kinds of distinctions we've been talking about
_aren't_ hard and fast. How do you publish A FINE AND PRIVATE PLACE? There
is no one answer, nor should there be. Look at CONJURE WIFE, a book that has
been variously packaged as fantasy, occult, gothic, and science fiction.
And the trouble with having every writer bend themselves into a savvy
marketing wise-guy is that you then tend to get tons of books written to what
the wise-guy writers perceive to be the Marketing Niches, which is to say, the
Marketing Niches of two or more years ago.
I agree that it's a fine thing for writers to look at marketing and packaging
and what works and who does what. But it's also a fine thing to toss all that
aside and write brilliant books that come from the heart. The first is a good
thing to be able to do. The second is essential.
-----
Patrick Nielsen Hayden : p...@panix.com : http://www.panix.com/~pnh
P Nielsen Hayden
In article <5vaca6$d...@excalibur.gooroos.com>, gra...@gooroos.com (Graydon) wrote:
>In article <5va4vj$1...@news1.panix.com>,
>P Nielsen Hayden <p...@panix.com> wrote:
>>and what works and who does what. But it's also a fine thing to toss all that
>
>>aside and write brilliant books that come from the heart. The first is a good
>
>>thing to be able to do. The second is essential.
>
>cover letter when one wishes to tell the editor 'I have no idea in the
>world what the appropriate marketing category for this story is, despite
>having thought about it at length?'
Well, those words would work fine for me. Mileage may vary.
Marks Robert B
Graydon (gra...@gooroos.com) wrote:
: At the risk of rendering the answer useless, what does one put on the
: cover letter when one wishes to tell the editor 'I have no idea in the
: world what the appropriate marketing category for this story is, despite
: having thought about it at length?'
My experience with cover letters has been that one gives a VERY general
notion of what the manuscript is about, and then in the outline provides
enough information for the publisher to decide if it is his/her sort of
book to publish. Hence, for the cover letter, the words "fantasy" or
"science-fiction" cover a huge amount of territory.
PMccutc103
Liz <L...@gila.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>I guess I shouldn't have thought the one word answer would do. <sigh>
>Marketing: you need to understand the best place to send your manuscript
>so that it will fit that publisher's/magazine's needs. Otherwise,
>you're just wasting your time and theirs.
Oh sure. But for that, I don't need to make any sort of metaphysical
distinction about the differences between occult and fantasy. Instead, I
just say, "well, is this the kind of thing that I see in _Analog_ or the
_Realms of Fantasy_ or _MZB's_ or even _Odyssey_, just so Liz doesn't think
I've forgotten her." And then I send it to the place that publishes stuff
that has a generally similar tone and texture.
________________________
Pete McCutchen
PMccutc103
p...@panix.com (P Nielsen Hayden) wrote:
>But it's also a fine thing to toss all that
>aside and write brilliant books that come from the heart. The first is a
>good
>thing to be able to do. The second is essential.
Having mastered that "from the heart" part, I am now working on the
"brilliant books" part.
________________________
Pete McCutchen
PWrede6492
>At the risk of rendering the answer useless, what does one put on the
>cover letter when one wishes to tell the editor 'I have no idea in the
>world what the appropriate marketing category for this story is, despite
>having thought about it at length?'
"Dear Editor: Enclosed is a copy of my manuscript/portion-and-outline.
I hope you like it. In case you do not like it, I have enclosed a SASE
so that you can return it to me. Thank you for your time. Sincerely,
John Q. Author."
Nothing more is required. However --
If the book involves serious expertise of a particular sort, you may add,
after "I hope you like it" a sentence along the lines of "I have made
use of my background as a NASA technician/accountant/house painter
in the relevant portions of the story." If you have previously sold short
fiction or novels, you may add, "I have sold 3/5/8/? stories to Analog/
Asimovs/Whatever, but this is my first novel" or "My first novel will be
coming out from Blast Publishing in June of 2010."
Nothing more than this is advisable.
Patricia C. Wrede
Fred Welden
In article <19970911210...@ladder01.news.aol.com> PWrede6492 (pwred...@aol.com) wrote:
> Figuring out where to send something is not that hard, if
> one is halfway paying attention.
I got pretty bent out of shape by this and fired off an angry
response. Luckily my newsreader crashed as I was sending it--it's
clever that way--and I had time to realize this is probably a
tone-of-voice thing and you really didn't mean to call me an idiot.
If you *did* mean to call me an idiot, please send me e-mail so we can
sort that out in private.
I am halfway paying attention, and I spent several years trying to
figure out where to send my first novel. I never placed it, and in
fact I never succeeding in finding a publisher or agent who would
agree that it was even the sort of thing that they handled. The only
books that I know of that seem to me to be like it are published by
houses that flatly refuse unagented submissions. I consider figuring
out where to send this is, in fact, "that hard."
> >More unfortunately, in my opinion, there is a broad and fuzzy border
> >between writing the novel and then deciding how to sell it, and setting
> >out to write a specific sort of saleable novel in the first place.
> I wouldn't call it a broad fuzzy border. I'd call it a gap resembling
> the Grand Canyon. But perhaps it's foggy on your side.
I'm confused by this. Do you mean that you always write what you
think will sell, or that you never consider the saleability of what
you write, or what? It's definitely getting foggy out here in
Dobonia.
> >I get a little twinge when I'm writing and the thought "Maybe I better not
> >do this here, 'cause if I do where the hell am I going to send this
> >puppy when I'm done with it?" even starts to percolate into conscious
> >consideration.
> It sounds as if you have far more confidence in your skills as
> regards market analysis than you do in your skills as regards
> creation and composition. Or am I misunderstanding what
> you are attempting to say?
I'm afraid so--I must have been overconfident in my writing skills
when I wrote that post, anyway. I am a good writer--still trying to
improve, but I've read enough and been read enough to know that I'm
good at this. As to market analysis, it scares me: if I get to know
really well what's out there and what sells, won't that influence my
writing? Will the influence be a good one or a bad one? On the one
hand, if I never get published, I haven't reached very many readers
and that's a kind of failure. On the other, if I write Yet Another
Cyberpunk Novel and sell a million copies, I still haven't reached
very many readers with the things I really *want* to say, and that's
another kind of failure.
And of course, the likeliest thing is that if I dropped the stuff I
wanted to write and started turning out the Yet Another series of
novels I would still go unpublished. Which I consider to be every
kind of failure rolled into one.
Please be kind enough to recall, when responding, that these are not
the self-indulgent agonies of a 12-year-old who has vague dreams of
being the next Robert Heinlein and hasn't ever actually written
anything: they are the self-indulgent agonies of a 39-year-old who's
written a novel and spent about three years submitting it to editors
and agents without success, is more than halfway done with another
novel, has a couple of dozen shorter works under his belt, worked in a
publishing house for seven years, and is willing and able to deal with
rejection and criticism in hopes of getting his stuff published.
--Fred | wel...@ntrnet.net http://www.ntrnet.net/~welden (mod. 06Aug97)
| An artist knows no greater reward than the praise of strangers.
J Scott Burke
wel...@ns1.ntrnet.net (Fred Welden) wrote:
>Please be kind enough to recall, when responding, that these are not
>the self-indulgent agonies of a 12-year-old who has vague dreams of
>being the next Robert Heinlein and hasn't ever actually written
>anything: they are the self-indulgent agonies of a 39-year-old who's
>written a novel and spent about three years submitting it to editors
>and agents without success, is more than halfway done with another
>novel, has a couple of dozen shorter works under his belt, worked in a
>publishing house for seven years, and is willing and able to deal with
>rejection and criticism in hopes of getting his stuff published.
Don't despair, Fred; you're in good company. Gary may say I'm talking
through my hat again, but it seems to me that just about every work
that had an easy time getting accepted was doomed to 15 minutes of
fame and then oblivion. Many of those books that had a tough time--
THOMAS COVENANT, LOTR, A CLOCKWORK ORANGE, a hundred others--are
classics that are still alive today, when many of their contemporaries
have gone the way of the Apocrypha in the Protestant churches. Truly
groundbreaking stuff is rare and is not always seen for what it really
is; I can't really blame the industry for not snatching up such stuff,
because the old tropes are safer and promise a marginal profit. I've
read the first parts of your book (REMOTE CONTROL), and, IMO, it's
great stuff; if the rest of the book is as good as the start, you
shouldn't worry about whether it's "good enough" or not.
At the moment, I'm co-authoring a near-future book wherein the Pope
takes over the civilized world; I know it's going to be a hell of
a hard sell, but it's something I really want to write. We could
have done another book about an Arab warlord or a Chinese dictator
waging the Next Big War, but those things don't grab me like the
idea of the Pope in the same position does. Just write what you're
driven to write--that's the best advice I've ever been given.
Peace,
jsb
PWrede6492
In article <5vbvuu$d81$0...@206.66.160.2>, wel...@ns1.ntrnet.net (Fred
Welden) writes:
>In article <19970911210...@ladder01.news.aol.com> PWrede6492
>(pwred...@aol.com) wrote:
>> Figuring out where to send something is not that hard, if
>> one is halfway paying attention.
>
> I had time to realize this is probably a
>tone-of-voice thing and you really didn't mean to call me an idiot.
I did not, in fact, call you an idiot. I chose the neutral "one" very
deliberately to avoid doing so. The more commonly used "you"
can be interpreted, in English, as either "you-the-specific-person-
to-whom-I-am-talking" or "you-a-generic-catch-all-for-anybody-who-
might-do-this-sort-of-thing." It appears that despite my attempt
to avoid this specific confusion, you took the "one" as "you-the-
specific" anyway. What would you suggest I try instead, in the
future?
>The only
>books that I know of that seem to me to be like it are published by
>houses that flatly refuse unagented submissions. I consider figuring
>out where to send this is, in fact, "that hard."
Excuse me, but it sounds to me as if you *have* figured out
where to send it. Your problem is that the places you thing it
ought to go won't look at unagented submissions. This is not
a problem with figuring out where it goes; it's a problem with getting
it through the door you have already picked out -- which is, to be
sure, a problem (and a frustrating one indeed for you), but not
the same problem I was addressing in my comment.
>> I wouldn't call it a broad fuzzy border. I'd call it a gap resembling
>> the Grand Canyon. But perhaps it's foggy on your side.
>
>I'm confused by this. Do you mean that you always write what you
>think will sell, or that you never consider the saleability of what
>you write, or what? It's definitely getting foggy out here in
>Dobonia.
I personally don't worry about selling what I am in the process
of writing. The sales part comes afterward. I know writers who
do worry, while they are writing, about selling whatever-it-is they
are working on. I have not noticed any sort of gradual transition,
foggy or otherwise, between the two positions (write-to-the-market
vs. don't-think-about-it-while-writing). Mostly, I have
seen the two camps perched on opposite sides of a chasm,
throwing rocks at each other, with an occasional uncommitted
soul wandering around trying to decide which rim of the canyon
to pick (and usually getting hit by rocks from both sides for her
indecision).
>good at this. As to market analysis, it scares me: if I get to know
>really well what's out there and what sells, won't that influence my
>writing? Will the influence be a good one or a bad one?
If you do not think you have the skills of marketing analysis,
I fail to see why you would listen to yourself. I mean, if John Q.
Hotshot, whom you know has very little marketing knowledge
and few analytical skills, were to give you advice about selling
your book, would you change what you were doing on the basis
of it? Why would you listen to advice you think is bad, just
because you are giving it to yourself? And if it *is* good advice,
what's wrong with listening to it?
This sounds an awful lot like the "Art vs. Commercialism"
argument, which I have heard 8 million times and have always
thought was rather silly. They're two sides of the same coin,
and if you try to separate them, you have to saw the coin in
half, which destroys it. Personally, I prefer to put the coin in
my piggy bank and get back to writing, but other folks seem
to get annoyed with me a lot when I suggest this solution to
them.
>anything: they are the self-indulgent agonies of a 39-year-old who's
>written a novel and spent about three years submitting it to editors
>and agents without success, is more than halfway done with another
>novel, has a couple of dozen shorter works under his belt, worked in a
>publishing house for seven years, and is willing and able to deal with
>rejection and criticism in hopes of getting his stuff published.
Three years' worth of sending something around doesn't actually strike
me as unusual, unfortunately. It is also not unusual to feel very low
indeed after spending three fruitless years marketing something, however
"normal" that length of time may be.
You wrote at some length about all the things you would consider to
be failures -- not selling the sort of thing you want to write, not selling at
all, etc. What, exactly, would you consider "success"? Would a small
press publication of 500 copies of your first novel be "success," or will
you only be satisfied by a NY Times Bestseller/Hugo Award winner/etc.?
I run into an awful lot of just-getting-started writers for whom the rather
fuzzy goal of "publication" is the be-all and end-all...they think. It isn't,
you know. It's just the bottom rung of a whole new ladder, and sometimes
it helps to check out which wall you've got it leaned up against before
you start climbing.
Patricia C. Wrede
Graydon
In article <5vbvuu$d81$0...@206.66.160.2>,
Fred Welden <wel...@ns1.ntrnet.net> wrote:
>I am halfway paying attention, and I spent several years trying to
>figure out where to send my first novel. I never placed it, and in
>fact I never succeeding in finding a publisher or agent who would
>books that I know of that seem to me to be like it are published by
>houses that flatly refuse unagented submissions. I consider figuring
>out where to send this is, in fact, "that hard."
I'm still seeking agency, but this is sorta halfway like what I've found
and halfway like what I'm afraid I'm going to find.
What _does_ one do when there is nothing to point to and say 'it's like
that'?
Graydon
In article <19970912202...@ladder01.news.aol.com>,
PWrede6492 <pwred...@aol.com> wrote:
>In article <5vaca6$d...@excalibur.gooroos.com>, gra...@gooroos.com
>(Graydon) writes:
>>At the risk of rendering the answer useless, what does one put on the
>>cover letter when one wishes to tell the editor 'I have no idea in the
>>world what the appropriate marketing category for this story is, despite
>>having thought about it at length?'
>
>"Dear Editor: Enclosed is a copy of my manuscript/portion-and-outline.
>I hope you like it. In case you do not like it, I have enclosed a SASE
>so that you can return it to me. Thank you for your time. Sincerely,
>John Q. Author."
Which is about what I want to say, but so far all the submissions
guidelines I've found want a summary (ugh) and some statement about genre,
I assume so that they know who to hand it to after it gets past the first
reader if it gets past the first reader.
I get the consistent impression from this group that most submissions
guidelines beyond the manuscript format ones are someone insubstantial.
>Nothing more is required. However --
>
>If the book involves serious expertise of a particular sort, you may add,
>after "I hope you like it" a sentence along the lines of "I have made
>use of my background as a NASA technician/accountant/house painter
>in the relevant portions of the story." If you have previously sold short
'This may make more sense if you have some familiarity with Norse
cosmology' doesn't fall into that category, I don't think. (One of the
friends who has read it offered the opinion that it was like what they
assume Gene Wolfe is like if you don't have a classics degree. I couldn't
decide if I should be complimented or miffed, and settled for urgling.)
>fiction or novels, you may add, "I have sold 3/5/8/? stories to Analog/
>Asimovs/Whatever, but this is my first novel" or "My first novel will be
>coming out from Blast Publishing in June of 2010."
<avert>
>Nothing more than this is advisable.
Ok, thanks.
Gary Farber
In <5vcrie$s...@excalibur.gooroos.com> Graydon <gra...@gooroos.com> wrote:
[. . .]
: I'm still seeking agency, but this is sorta halfway like what I've found
: and halfway like what I'm afraid I'm going to find.
: What _does_ one do when there is nothing to point to and say 'it's like
: that'?
If it's good, be proud. Then send it to a publishing house that publishes
books that aren't stamped out of a cookie-cutter mold, or to an editor who
edits books that display taste that has wide scope. As I've said before,
sending non-agented manuscripts directly to an editor by name is far and
away the best way to go.
Jo Walton
In article <5vcrie$s...@excalibur.gooroos.com>
gra...@gooroos.com "Graydon" writes:
> What _does_ one do when there is nothing to point to and say 'it's like
> that'?
Or when it seems terribly presumptuous to say that it's like the things
it's like? ("It's in the same genre as :Lord of Light:, :The Bone
People: and :To Reign in Hell:...")
--
Jo - - I kissed a kif at Kefk - - J...@bluejo.demon.co.uk
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Blue Jo Web Page - Blood of Kings Poetry, Reviews, Interstichia
20 poems by me, 11 poems by Graydon, Momentum Guidelines,
storytelling card games... all at http://www.bluejo.demon.co.uk
Nancy Lebovitz
In article <340e4a56....@news.teleport.com>,
Tara K. Harper <until@dontsendjunk_teleport.com> wrote:
>
>On 3 Sep 1997 23:22:16 -0400, gfa...@panix.com (Gary Farber) wrote:
>
>> In <340e1f9b....@news.teleport.com> Tara K. Harper
>> <until@dontsendjunk_teleport.com> wrote:
>> [. . .]
>>
>> : Peter S. Beagle's _A Fine and Private Place_ is occult,
>> : not fantasy. His novel, _The Last Unicorn_, is fantasy,
>> : not occult.
>>
>> You state these opinions as if these were universally acknowledged hard
>> facts, rather than personal guidelines. Or is there a source you feel
>> should be acknowledged as authoritative by all?
>
>Nope. Just opinions. But _A Fine and Private Place_
>has nothing "magical" about it. It's a ghost story, set
>in a cemetary (or two---I don't want to spoil it for anyone).
>_The Last Unicorn_ has fantasy elements, even though
>(to me) those fantasy elements are not the important part
>of the story (I'd say they merely provided the vehicle for
>Beagle's message).
>
Imho, the difference between occult and fantasy fiction is that
occult fiction implies that the fantastic elements are possible
(though perhaps on a smaller scale than in the fiction)
in the real world. I'm not sure that I could prove that Dion
Fortune is in a different category than Peter Beagle, but I
find that the fiction has a very different feel.
--
Nancy Lebovitz (nan...@universe.digex.net)
October '96 calligraphic button catalogue available by email!
Nancy Lebovitz
In article <5uinqh$32f$1...@darla.visi.com>, Dan Goodman <dsg...@visi.com> wrote:
>In article <5uin1f$c...@bgtnsc02.worldnet.att.net>,
>Dennis L. McKiernan <dl...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>>By the way, I wanted to add to this subject of magic ...
>> There are tales where powerful magic seems to be done by everyone ...
>> But I believe that in such a world where everything is possible,
>>nothing is very interesting. That is, if large diamonds were as
>>plentiful as grains of sand, they wouldn't hold any value.
>
>But whatever _was_ rare might be valuable.
>
>And -- in a world where everyone can do magic we would consider powerful,
>two kinds of people might have prized skills:
>
>The ones who can do _really_ powerful magic, not puny stuff like
>destroying one of the moons and making everyone remember falsely that
>there's always been only one moon.
>
>The ones who have "negative" magic -- magic doesn't work on them, or
>around them.
>
>I believe all of these have been used, several times each, in published
>sf.
>
I'll nominate a third category--being good at convincing people with
powerful magic to go along with one's plans.
Liz
In article <19970912181...@ladder02.news.aol.com>, PMccutc103
<pmccu...@aol.com> writes
Oh. Okay. I thought you might think that. That's why I was surprised
when I the one word answer (remind you of something I thought you knew,
in other words) didn't cut it.
Liz
In article <19970911210...@ladder01.news.aol.com>, PWrede6492
<pwred...@aol.com> writes
>Figuring out where to send something is not that hard, if
>one is halfway paying attention.
At a quick guess, I'd say that figuring out where to send something is
relatively easy if one is writing firmly "in genre". But it sounds to
me as if Fred might be doing something either between genres or
slipstreamy, and I can see how that might be tricky to place.
Liz
>
<snip Pete asking about Marketing and me replying that in author terms
it means knowing where to send your work>
>But the problem is, the kinds of distinctions we've been talking about
>_aren't_ hard and fast. How do you publish A FINE AND PRIVATE PLACE? There
>is no one answer, nor should there be. Look at CONJURE WIFE, a book that has
>been variously packaged as fantasy, occult, gothic, and science fiction.
>
>And the trouble with having every writer bend themselves into a savvy
>marketing wise-guy is that you then tend to get tons of books written to what
>the wise-guy writers perceive to be the Marketing Niches, which is to say, the
>Marketing Niches of two or more years ago.
>
>I agree that it's a fine thing for writers to look at marketing and packaging
>and what works and who does what. But it's also a fine thing to toss all that
>aside and write brilliant books that come from the heart. The first is a good
>thing to be able to do. The second is essential.
Patrick, I agree entirely. But would you agree that either having a
need to write commercially, or having written from the heart (lovely
phrase!), it can't harm for a writer to know which houses are buying,
which only take agented subs, which stick firmly to genre - and (pace
your examples) which are willing to take risks or publish work which is
between genres or borderline to several?
P Nielsen Hayden
>Patrick, I agree entirely. But would you agree that either having a
>need to write commercially, or having written from the heart (lovely
>phrase!), it can't harm for a writer to know which houses are buying,
>which only take agented subs, which stick firmly to genre - and (pace
>your examples) which are willing to take risks or publish work which is
>between genres or borderline to several?
Of course it can't harm a writer to pay attention to these things. I'm
advising writers to not get so carried away that they start fretting over
whether A FINE AND PRIVATE PLACE is "occult" or "fantasy" -- fretting over it,
not as an interesting point of literary discussion, but as if getting the
answer right on the final exam was going to determine whether they are
marketing-savvy enough to be allowed to live.
I'm also pointing out that the fine points of marketing and packaging and
subgenre (1) differ from publisher to publisher and (2) change constantly.
You _can not_ nail these things down with literal-minded sci-fi-nerd
taxonomical precision, so you might as well relax and write what seems good.
Rather than getting a brain tumor worrying about whether vampire cyberpunk
Regency whodunits are likely to be published as mass-market leads this week.
(Of course, they are, but only if your manuscript is in Courier with a
one-inch margin on all sides of the text. And remember, we have rulers and
we're waiting.)
P Nielsen Hayden
In article <341B03...@ozemail.com.au>, Ankh <te...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>P Nielsen Hayden wrote:
>> Regency whodunits are likely to be published as mass-market leads this week.
>> (Of course, they are, but only if your manuscript is in Courier with a
>> one-inch margin on all sides of the text. And remember, we have rulers and
>> we're waiting.)
>
>What is it with these one-inch margins? What purpose do they serve?
>
>On an incidental note, in Aus we don't have this "letter-sized" paper
>that the sub guidelines always seem to ask for. We have A4, which is
>a little longer. Would you like to see submissions which pretend they're
>on letter-size? (Ie. same amount of words per page and big blank bit down
>the bottom?)
I now know despair.
Graydon
In article <341B03...@ozemail.com.au>, Ankh <te...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>P Nielsen Hayden wrote:
>> Regency whodunits are likely to be published as mass-market leads this week.
>> (Of course, they are, but only if your manuscript is in Courier with a
>> one-inch margin on all sides of the text. And remember, we have rulers and
>> we're waiting.)
>
>What is it with these one-inch margins? What purpose do they serve?
Same reason they want them double spaced; so there is room to write on the
thing.
Baen's web page asks for 1.5" margins all round; from this I conclude that
Jim Baen has unusually large handwriting.
Liz
In article <5vf44t$d...@news1.panix.com>, P Nielsen Hayden
<p...@panix.com> writes
>In article <341B03...@ozemail.com.au>, Ankh <te...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>>P Nielsen Hayden wrote:
>>> Regency whodunits are likely to be published as mass-market leads this week.
>>> (Of course, they are, but only if your manuscript is in Courier with a
>>> one-inch margin on all sides of the text. And remember, we have rulers and
>>> we're waiting.)
>>
>>What is it with these one-inch margins? What purpose do they serve?
>>
>>that the sub guidelines always seem to ask for. We have A4, which is
>>a little longer. Would you like to see submissions which pretend they're
>>on letter-size? (Ie. same amount of words per page and big blank bit down
>>the bottom?)
>
>I now know despair.
>
>-----
>Patrick Nielsen Hayden : p...@panix.com : http://www.panix.com/~pnh
Actually, some years ago there was a rumour doing the rounds over here
(UK) that US publishers/magazines won't accept subs on A4. Those of us
who were wet behind the ears at the time were mightily worried by it, I
can tell you. (Mentioning no names, of course.) It still does crop up
about MZBFM, and a lot of Brits would like to know the answer.
Incidentally, the rumour was started by an ex-pat American fan who said,
IIRC, that she'd worked in publishing.
WooF
On Sat, 13 Sep 1997, P Nielsen Hayden wrote:
> In article <341B03...@ozemail.com.au>, Ankh <te...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
> >P Nielsen Hayden wrote:
> >> Regency whodunits are likely to be published as mass-market leads this week.
> >> (Of course, they are, but only if your manuscript is in Courier with a
> >> one-inch margin on all sides of the text. And remember, we have rulers and
> >> we're waiting.)
> >
> >What is it with these one-inch margins? What purpose do they serve?
> >
> >On an incidental note, in Aus we don't have this "letter-sized" paper
> >that the sub guidelines always seem to ask for. We have A4, which is
> >a little longer. Would you like to see submissions which pretend they're
> >on letter-size? (Ie. same amount of words per page and big blank bit down
> >the bottom?)
>
> I now know despair.
>
Cheer up, Pat; I'll take over for a moment.
One inch margins are so the reader can pick up a sheet of the MS and hond
it without obsuring some of the text. They are also handy places for the
editor and copy-editor to make marginal notes.
As for A-4 paper -- if you stop typing or printing about 10 inches from
the top of the paper, then, if someone in the US needs to make a
xerographic copy of the manuscript, there's no need to fiddle with the
reduction/enlargement controls; the text will fit nicely onto our 8.5x11
inch paper.
George Scithers of owls...@netaxs.com
Ankh
P Nielsen Hayden wrote:
> Regency whodunits are likely to be published as mass-market leads this week.
> (Of course, they are, but only if your manuscript is in Courier with a
> one-inch margin on all sides of the text. And remember, we have rulers and
> we're waiting.)
What is it with these one-inch margins? What purpose do they serve?
On an incidental note, in Aus we don't have this "letter-sized" paper
that the sub guidelines always seem to ask for. We have A4, which is
a little longer. Would you like to see submissions which pretend they're
on letter-size? (Ie. same amount of words per page and big blank bit down
the bottom?)
A
P Nielsen Hayden
>Actually, some years ago there was a rumour doing the rounds over here
>(UK) that US publishers/magazines won't accept subs on A4. Those of us
>who were wet behind the ears at the time were mightily worried by it, I
>can tell you. (Mentioning no names, of course.) It still does crop up
>about MZBFM, and a lot of Brits would like to know the answer.
>
>Incidentally, the rumour was started by an ex-pat American fan who said,
>IIRC, that she'd worked in publishing.
I have no idea what strange policies MZBFM may have in effect. I never heard
of such a silly thing, though.
Dorothy J Heydt
In article <5vf44t$d...@news1.panix.com>,
P Nielsen Hayden <p...@panix.com> wrote:
>In article <341B03...@ozemail.com.au>, Ankh <te...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>>On an incidental note, in Aus we don't have this "letter-sized" paper
>>that the sub guidelines always seem to ask for. We have A4, which is
>>a little longer. Would you like to see submissions which pretend they're
>>on letter-size? (Ie. same amount of words per page and big blank bit down
>>the bottom?)
>I now know despair.
Well, while Patrick is despairing, let me put some words into his
mouth. Yes, I suspect that he would much rather you sent him
your manuscript, on your A4 paper, with a very wide bottom
margin, as though it were on 11-inch paper. Why? Because if
your manuscript is any good, he's gonna want to make photocopies
of it and send it around to his colleagues. And he's going to copy
it onto 11-inch paper because that's what he's got. And it would be
such a pity if the bottom line of text on each page were cut off....
Dorothy J. Heydt
Albany, California
djheydt@uclink
(My account might go away at any moment; if I disappear, I haven't died.)
Ankh
WooF wrote:
> > >What is it with these one-inch margins? What purpose do they serve?
> > >
> > >that the sub guidelines always seem to ask for. We have A4, which is
> > >a little longer. Would you like to see submissions which pretend they're
> > >on letter-size? (Ie. same amount of words per page and big blank bit down
> > >the bottom?)
> >
> > I now know despair.
> >
>
> One inch margins are so the reader can pick up a sheet of the MS and hond
> it without obsuring some of the text. They are also handy places for the
> editor and copy-editor to make marginal notes.
>
> As for A-4 paper -- if you stop typing or printing about 10 inches from
> the top of the paper, then, if someone in the US needs to make a
> xerographic copy of the manuscript, there's no need to fiddle with the
> reduction/enlargement controls; the text will fit nicely onto our 8.5x11
> inch paper.
Thanks. I figured there might be some value to "pretending" the paper
was letter-sized rather than A4, but wasn't sure if it'd make any
difference to editors. After all, it's better for me to use the full
page, because of postage and paper costs. Asking about the margins
was just curiosity, as to what you used the margins for.
And sorry to make you despair, PNH. I'll endeavour to be a mind reader
in future.
A
P Nielsen Hayden
>And sorry to make you despair, PNH. I'll endeavour to be a mind reader
>in future.
You don't need to be a mindreader. However, your query about margins followed
directly onto my assertion that we were all waiting for your submissions with
our rulers out, and that the size of margins was the first thing we check.
This was a tiny, pathetic attempt at a joke, and I mourn for it. Don't mind
me, I'll just sit here in a corner with my head in a paper sack.
-----
Patrick Nielsen Hayden : p...@panix.com : http://www.panix.com/~pnh
"or, as Will Shetterly says, 'like a joke, only different at the end'"
Helen Kenyon
In article <5vfclp$f...@news1.panix.com>, P Nielsen Hayden
<p...@panix.com> writes
MZBFM bought a story of mine which was submitted on A4 paper. So as long
as all the other things are as specified i.e. Courier 12, double-spaced,
1" margins etc. paper size doesn't seem to matter. Though I must admit,
knowing how irritating Letter size paper is to a Brit when it comes to
filing, A4 might not fit in US files or folders. I suppose you could
guillotine the ends off A4 if you really thought it was annoying
editors.
Helen
--
Helen Kenyon, Gwynedd, Wales * "Er gwaetha pawb a phopeth, ryn ni yma o hyd"
(Despite everything and everybody, we're still here.)
Home page http://www.baradel.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: ken...@baradel.demon.co.uk
**Please remove NO-SPAM etc. from e-mail address if replying by mail**
Dennis L. McKiernan
P Nielsen Hayden wrote:
> This was a tiny, pathetic attempt at a joke, and I mourn for it.
Patrick, I really appreciated that joke, though. It was truly funny.
---Dennis
--
Dennis L. McKiernan
Just released: Into the Forge
Forthcoming ('98): Into the Fire
Recent Books: The Dragonstone; Caverns of Socrates
J Scott Burke
p...@panix.com (P Nielsen Hayden) wrote:
>
>This was a tiny, pathetic attempt at a joke, and I mourn for it. Don't mind
>me, I'll just sit here in a corner with my head in a paper sack.
I thought the whole damn thing was an extended joke; but I guess I
have a bland sense of humor. The very first suspense story of
mine that was ever bought was single-spaced (but with 1-inch
margins!). The editor told me if it had been just an okay story, he'd
have pitched it; and he made me submit a second double-spaced copy
for typesetting.
This moment needs to be immortalized--in a double dactyl.
Peace,
jsb
PWrede6492
In article <5vgn9h$p...@news1.panix.com>, p...@panix.com (P Nielsen Hayden)
writes:
>This was a tiny, pathetic attempt at a joke, and I mourn for it. Don't mind
>me, I'll just sit here in a corner with my head in a paper sack.
There, there, Patrick. I thought it was funny.
Pat Wrede
jennifer mottram
WooF wrote:
> As for A-4 paper -- if you stop typing or printing about 10 inches from
> the top of the paper, then, if someone in the US needs to make a
> xerographic copy of the manuscript, there's no need to fiddle with the
> reduction/enlargement controls; the text will fit nicely onto our 8.5x11
> inch paper.
>
> George Scithers of owls...@netaxs.com
Or, alternately, the Aus types could get a handy-dandy paper cutter! I
hear Staples has them on sale this week.
(that is paper -cutter- not paper -shredder-! Learn the difference
-before- you purchase!)
Cheers,
Jenn
--
|\ ___,,--, _
/,`--'' \-,,__,'/
___|,4 ) )_ __ ) /~-----'_________________________________
{ '---^~(_/-_) (_/_) }
[ ath...@geocities.com jenn mottram ]
[ http://www.geocities.com/Athens/2464 Torrington, CT USA ]
{____________________________________________________________}
Dan Goodman
In article <19970914214...@ladder01.news.aol.com>,
PMccutc103 <pmccu...@aol.com> wrote:
>Liz <L...@gila.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>Actually, some years ago there was a rumour doing the rounds over here
>>(UK) that US publishers/magazines won't accept subs on A4.
>
>paper sizes, what is A4 paper?
Many copy machines are set up to take both US standard paper size (8 1/2"
x 11") and A4 (which is, I think, a bit longer and a bit narrower).
Looking at such a copy machine should give you a reasonable idea of A4's
size.
Some copy machines in the US may still be set up so they can use the old
Federal paper size -- 8" x 10 1/2". Roughly speaking: In the 1920's,
there were no standard paper sizes; each manufacturer had its own
standard. The US government set up a committee to standardize business
paper sizes. About the same time, another part of the US government set
up a committee to standardize Federal government paper sizes. The two
committees did not communicate with each other.
--
Dan Goodman
dsg...@visi.com
http://www.visi.com/~dsgood/index.html
Whatever you wish for me, may you have twice as much.
PMccutc103
Liz <L...@gila.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>Actually, some years ago there was a rumour doing the rounds over here
>(UK) that US publishers/magazines won't accept subs on A4.
For those of us who like cider but don't know everything about British
paper sizes, what is A4 paper?
And if I send something to a British magazine (like _Odyssey_) on the
regular 8.5 x 11 paper that fits in the bin of my laser-printer will I be
rejected/thought odd?
________________________
Pete McCutchen
Liz
Given that about ninety per cent of subs to Odyssey seem to come from
the US on US sized paper, I doubt it...
Liz
In article <SypuwFAR...@baradel.demon.co.uk>, Helen Kenyon
<ken...@baradel.demon.co.uk.NO-SPAM-PLEASE-DELETE> writes>>In article <xRBzoBA2...@gila.demon.co.uk>, Liz <L...@gila.demon.co.uk>
>>
>>>Actually, some years ago there was a rumour doing the rounds over here
>>>who were wet behind the ears at the time were mightily worried by it, I
>>>can tell you. (Mentioning no names, of course.) It still does crop up
>>>about MZBFM, and a lot of Brits would like to know the answer.
>>>
>>>Incidentally, the rumour was started by an ex-pat American fan who said,
>>>IIRC, that she'd worked in publishing.
>>
>>I have no idea what strange policies MZBFM may have in effect. I never heard
>>of such a silly thing, though.
>>
>>-----
>>Patrick Nielsen Hayden : p...@panix.com : http://www.panix.com/~pnh
>
>MZBFM bought a story of mine which was submitted on A4 paper. So as long
>as all the other things are as specified i.e. Courier 12, double-spaced,
>1" margins etc. paper size doesn't seem to matter. Though I must admit,
>knowing how irritating Letter size paper is to a Brit when it comes to
>filing, A4 might not fit in US files or folders. I suppose you could
>guillotine the ends off A4 if you really thought it was annoying
>editors.
>
>Helen
>
photocopiers. I know better now, but it sounded so _reasonable_ at the
time...
Jonathan L Cunningham
In article <5vgn9h$p...@news1.panix.com>, p...@panix.com (P Nielsen Hayden) writes:
> In article <341B7D...@ozemail.com.au>, Ankh <te...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>
> >And sorry to make you despair, PNH. I'll endeavour to be a mind reader
> >in future.
(snip)
> This was a tiny, pathetic attempt at a joke, and I mourn for it. Don't mind
> me, I'll just sit here in a corner with my head in a paper sack.
While PNH is not looking, can I also ask an idiot question? Yes, I
can. Here it is:
Some years back, I decided to write off for submission guidelines from
a couple of well-known American mags. I can't remember the exact wording
(in tiny print) but it was along the lines of "send a SASE size <n>".
I forget <n> - maybe 10 or something. You probably know it.
After figuring out that an SASE was probably an SAE (I'm lousy at
crosswords, too) my next problem was figuring out how big a #10
envelope was. I tried asking around, I even tried a reference library.
No luck. Ok, this wasn't a full-time occupation, but a week later I
still didn't know. I'm sure that any short story I submitted would be
discarded unread, if I sent the wrong size envelope (this accounts for
many rejections to other unpublished writers, no doubt). Anyway, I
then had an inspiration: I selected a #10 size envelope as the paper
size in my word-processor, and measured it. Voila! I had my answer.
Of course, it's impossible for me to find such an envelope but perhaps,
just maybe, the smallest international size just larger would be
acceptable?
The next problem is the postage, and now we are getting near my eejit
question. I can't easily buy US postage stamps. But there is such a
thing as IRCs (also mentioned, for the benefit of non-US writers, in the
tiny writing mentioning the SASE and giving the editorial address).
After I looked up what an IRC was, and found a post-office that sold
them (quite easy actually), I became the proud owner of several IRCs.
So, several years later, my idiot question is: how many of them should
I send?
Jonathan
p.s. The answer to the A4 question wasn't obvious to me, either.
p.p.s. I'm not such a fool that the only reason I haven't written off
for the guidelines was lack of information about IRCs.
p.p.p.s. Isn't it about time that the US switched to A4 paper? Or
maybe accepted electronic submissions - ah, no, we've already had
that argument :-).
--
--
Home: j...@sofluc.demon.co.uk Work (temporary): j...@math.sintef.no