Free Trial Subscription to Absolute Magnitude
Warren Lapine & Angela Kessler
Absolute Magnitude. To take advantage of this offer simply e-mail
your address to dnapubl...@iname.com before February 25th 2001. The
subscription will consist of Absolute Magnitude #15 and #16 Absolute
Magnitude # 15 features an original cover by Bob Eggleton, and work by
Chris Bunch, Allen Steele, Michael A. Burstein, Geoffrey Landis, and
George Barr. This offer is only good for new subscriptions and to
residents of the United States.
--
DNA Publications, Inc. - Publishers of Genre Magazines
SF Chronicle * Absolute Magnitude * Weird Tales * Dreams of Decadence *
Aboriginal * Fantastic Stories * Mythic Delirium
Visit our website: http://www.dnapublications.com/
Subscribe to our FREE e-mail newsletter:
http://www.egroups.com/subscribe/dnapublications
Doug Wickstrom
<MPG.14fa63315...@news.i-plus.net>
Warren Lapine & Angela Kessler <dnapubl...@iname.com>
excited the ether to say:
>DNA Publications is now offering a free two issue trial subscription to
I'd hate to think that your participation has all been a lead-up
to posting a freaking off-topic advert.
--
Doug Wickstrom
"I tend to feel irritated when someone else turns out to know a fact I thought
only I knew--like invasion of private territory." --Isaac Asimov
Warren Lapine & Angela Kessler
nims...@uswest.net says...
> On Sun, 18 Feb 2001 22:55:13 -0500, in message
> <MPG.14fa63315...@news.i-plus.net>
> Warren Lapine & Angela Kessler <dnapubl...@iname.com>
> excited the ether to say:
>
> >DNA Publications is now offering a free two issue trial subscription to
>
> I'd hate to think that your participation has all been a lead-up
> to posting a freaking off-topic advert.
>
>
to think that. But I've been posting in these news groups on and off for
years. I stopped a while back because when I installed Norton's fire
wall on my system it had a conflict with Netscape which made netscape
crash every time I tried to use a rec.arts newsgroup. I was busy as hell
and didn't really have time to look into new news readers until recently.
I have a news group for both myself and DNA publications on sffnet. If
you don't believe me, feel free to check out the discussions on my
browser problems there. I'm using Gravity now and I'm really happy with
it. Lighten up!
Warren
Peter Knutsen
Graydon Saunders wrote:
> Which means you have absolutely no excuse for posting that ad.
>
> You've just permanently lost at least one potential customer, and
> converted them into someone with a strong preference for seeing your
> publications fail.
Make that *two*. He posts an ad in a non-commercial newsgroup, but
not only that, it is an ad which is only of interest to the citizens
of one specific country. In an *international* newsgroup.
--
Peter Knutsen
Warren Lapine & Angela Kessler
says...
> On Mon, 19 Feb 2001 02:26:37 -0500,
> Warren Lapine & Angela Kessler <dnapubl...@iname.com> scripsit:
> >Considering that we don't agree on much of anything, I doubt you'd hate
> >to think that. But I've been posting in these news groups on and off for
> >years.
>
>
> You've just permanently lost at least one potential customer, and
> converted them into someone with a strong preference for seeing your
> publications fail.
>
>
I'm Sorry, I didn't mean to offend anyone. I've been away from these
news groups since May of 2000. Back then I made similar posts without
getting this kind of response. Since people are obviously much more
adverse to this now than they were even nine months ago, I won't do it
again. If my publications fail, more than half of the short fiction
magazines of any size would be gone and considering the state of short
fiction I'm not sure the magazine field would recover.
Anne M. Marble
>
> Which means you have absolutely no excuse for posting that ad.
>
> You've just permanently lost at least one potential customer, and
> converted them into someone with a strong preference for seeing your
> publications fail.
Well, gee. As I hope to contribute to at least one of his publications some
day, and as I happen to _like_ Science Fiction Chronicle, I really hope
that doesn't happen. Boycott the magazines on your own if you wish. But
please try not to curse them into nothingness. Many of the rest of us on
this group read those magazines. Some of the people on this group have even
written for them.
"OK, honey, I'm throwing out the bath water. How odd, there's something
crying in the puddle. Hey, where did the baby go?"
I thought the announcement was a mistake myself, simply because I knew it
was going to generate some negative responses. But this sort of response
only serves to raise blood pressures. I have gotten more response to
similar "announcements" by simply writing privately to the offender and
pointing out the error of their ways. Legitimate businesses will stop
posting in a newsgroup if they know their announcements are not welcome
there.
Is those going to become one of those "don't spam" threads that takes up
more bandwidth than the original message itself? OK, I'm guilty of
contributing then. :->
Peter Knutsen
"Anne M. Marble" wrote:
> Well, gee. As I hope to contribute to at least one of his publications some
> day, and as I happen to _like_ Science Fiction Chronicle, I really hope
I'm not sure I'd dare submit anything, since this Warren fellow
seems to be unaware of the existence of a world outside of the
United States of America. He might buy a story from me and then
(after having said he'd buy it) realize that he is unable to pay
me, because he doesn't know how to handle all the details of payment
(sending, tax, accounting) to an extranational. I mean, I would
assume that a professional magazine could handle such things seam-
lessly, but Warren doesn't exactly come across as professional.
--
Peter Knutsen
Intending to keep his fiction at a safe distance from clueless
amateurs
Joyce Reynolds-Ward
wrote:
snip
>Legitimate businesses do not advertise in newsgroups.
Mmm, you'd be surprised, however, at the number of legitimate
businesses currently being approached by spammers and marketing types
who have Just! Discovered! Newsgroups! to advertise in newsgroups.
I'm part of an arts and crafts business e-list, and this question came
up when one of our members was hit by a "marketing group"
recommendation to advertise on newsgroups. From all reports, the
marketing group is a legit organization (they Just! Discovered!
Newsgroups!) but it was very, VERY fortunate that the person in
question asked us about it first.
Some newsgroups (not this one) do support advertising if properly
indicated in the header, or if it's in the sig, or if it's mentioned
as an aside in a post by a recognized, long-term regular. I will
occasionally call attention to specific theme eBay auctions for my
jewelry in relevant groups when it's appropriate (rabbit-themed
jewelry in rabbit groups, horse stuff in horse groups, etc).
There *are* marketplace newsgroups where advertising is the norm, and
those are the best ones for running advertising.
jrw
Karen Lofstrom
: Considering that we don't agree on much of anything, I doubt you'd hate
: to think that. But I've been posting in these news groups on and off for
: years.
Then why don't you REALIZE that dumping adspeak on our heads is offensive?
You could have mentioned this casually, as a friend to a friend, or better
yet, put it in your sig. But noooo, you have to drop a full-fledged ad on
our heads.
: Lighten up!
No.
That reminds me of the spammers' lament: Hey, why do you have to get so
upset about all of this? It's only an ad. It's only an email. Lighten up!
Just hit delete.
--
Karen Lofstrom lofs...@lava.net
----------------------------------------------------------------------
WHAT"S A ""K3WL D00D"" AND WH3R3 CAN 1 G3T S0M3!!!!!!!!!!!????????
Theresa Wojtasiewicz
>
> "Anne M. Marble" wrote:
>
> > Well, gee. As I hope to contribute to at least one of his publications some
> > day, and as I happen to _like_ Science Fiction Chronicle, I really hope
>
> I'm not sure I'd dare submit anything, since this Warren fellow
> seems to be unaware of the existence of a world outside of the
> United States of America. He might buy a story from me and then
> (after having said he'd buy it) realize that he is unable to pay
> me, because he doesn't know how to handle all the details of payment
> (sending, tax, accounting) to an extranational. I mean, I would
> assume that a professional magazine could handle such things seam-
> lessly, but Warren doesn't exactly come across as professional.
And from the preceding, I'd say, neither do you (come across as
professional, that is).
Warren has already apologized for his faux pas. Will you?
>
> --
> Peter Knutsen
> Intending to keep his fiction at a safe distance from clueless
> amateurs
As long as you can identify who the clueless amateurs are, I'd say that
was an admirable sentiment.
Ian A. York
Where I come from, saying "I'm sorry you're so hypersensitive" is not an
apology.
Ian
--
Ian York (iay...@panix.com) <http://www.panix.com/~iayork/>
"-but as he was a York, I am rather inclined to suppose him a
very respectable Man." -Jane Austen, The History of England
Peter Knutsen
Theresa Wojtasiewicz wrote:
> And from the preceding, I'd say, neither do you (come across as
> professional, that is).
No, I'm an amateur. But that's just one more reason why I need
a professional editor.
> Warren has already apologized for his faux pas. Will you?
Warren has made two mistakes and apologized for one. Have I
made any?
--
Peter Knutsen
Jim Bailey
>I'm not sure I'd dare submit anything, since this Warren fellow
>seems to be unaware of the existence of a world outside of the
>United States of America. He might buy a story from me and then
>(after having said he'd buy it) realize that he is unable to pay
>me, because he doesn't know how to handle all the details of payment
>(sending, tax, accounting) to an extranational. I mean, I would
>assume that a professional magazine could handle such things seam-
>lessly, but Warren doesn't exactly come across as professional.
>
>--
>Peter Knutsen
>Intending to keep his fiction at a safe distance from clueless
>amateurs
So you conclude from the eminently WISE decision for a small business to not
get stuck with a commitment to pay international postage on countless FREE
subscriptions out of pocket as "unprofessional"?
I guess you don't keep track of this field very well if you're able to make
such characterizations of his operation with a straight face.
Best,
Jim Bailey
Jim Bailey
>
>I'd hate to think that your participation has all been a lead-up
>to posting a freaking off-topic advert.
and
gra...@dsl.ca (Graydon Saunders) writes:
>Which means you have absolutely no excuse for posting that ad.
>
>You've just permanently lost at least one potential customer, and
>converted them into someone with a strong preference for seeing your
>publications fail.
Jesus Christ. Sometimes fen can be some of the most pedantic little fuckers in
the known universe.
EXPLAIN what he did wrong before pulling out the insults and bullshit about
"protecting" the ng's integrity. This kind of piss-ant bullyboy attitude is
FAR more damaging to the integrity of this community than a single mistake by a
known entity. It's not like we don't know where he lives if he repeats the
mistake and we need to go beat him with the rubber hoses.
Jim Bailey
Dan Goodman
He posted his ad to several newsgroups which had two things in common
-- they're related to sf, and they're not supposed to get ads.
He doesn't seem to be very forgiving when other people do things he
considers to be mistakes.
Dan Goodman
dsg...@visi.com
Whatever you wish for me, may you have twice as much.
http://www.visi.com/~dsgood/index.html
Whatever you wish for me, may you have twice as much.
Warren Lapine & Angela Kessler
>
>
> "Anne M. Marble" wrote:
>
> > Well, gee. As I hope to contribute to at least one of his publications some
> > day, and as I happen to _like_ Science Fiction Chronicle, I really hope
>
> I'm not sure I'd dare submit anything, since this Warren fellow
> seems to be unaware of the existence of a world outside of the
> United States of America. He might buy a story from me and then
> (after having said he'd buy it) realize that he is unable to pay
> me, because he doesn't know how to handle all the details of payment
> (sending, tax, accounting) to an extranational. I mean, I would
> assume that a professional magazine could handle such things seam-
> lessly, but Warren doesn't exactly come across as professional.
>
>
artist who I use the most is from the UK. He's damned talented and we
have no problem working over the distance. The offer was not extended to
the rest of the world because of the price of postage. It cost thirty
cents bulk mail to send a copy of the magazine anywhere inside the US.
To mail it outside of the US it more or less must go out first class.
Otherwise, fifty percent of the magazines will never arrive and the other
will take six months to get there. The cost for this to Canada is about
$2.00 per issue, the cost to Europe is $6.00 per issue, and the cost to
Eastern Europe and the Pacific rim is $8.00 per issue. This was
certainly not meant to slight anyone. Sixty cents per person is quite
easy to absorb. $16.00 per person isn't.
Warren Lapine & Angela Kessler
> In article <3A929646...@sympatico.ca>,
> Theresa Wojtasiewicz <tw...@sympatico.ca> wrote:
> >
> >Warren has already apologized for his faux pas.
>
> Where I come from, saying "I'm sorry you're so hypersensitive" is not an
> apology.
>
> Ian
>
>
Perhaps you should reread my post. That's not what I said. I did say
that that it was obvious that people are more adverse to this than they
have been in the past. It was an observation, I didn't make the value
judgment, you did. My apology was genuine. I didn't want to start a
fight or get people angry. I am sorry that my actions has caused this.
Warren
Warren Lapine & Angela Kessler
> Warren Lapine & Angela Kessler <dnapubl...@iname.com> wrote:
>
> : Considering that we don't agree on much of anything, I doubt you'd hate
> : to think that. But I've been posting in these news groups on and off for
> : years.
>
> Then why don't you REALIZE that dumping adspeak on our heads is offensive?
>
> You could have mentioned this casually, as a friend to a friend, or better
> yet, put it in your sig. But noooo, you have to drop a full-fledged ad on
> our heads.
>
> : Lighten up!
>
> No.
>
> That reminds me of the spammers' lament: Hey, why do you have to get so
> upset about all of this? It's only an ad. It's only an email. Lighten up!
> Just hit delete.
>
>
it again.
Warren Lapine & Angela Kessler
> On 20 Feb 2001 20:27:23 GMT, jame...@aol.com (Jim Bailey) wrote:
>
> >Doug Wickstrom nims...@uswest.net writes:
> >>
> >>I'd hate to think that your participation has all been a lead-up
> >>to posting a freaking off-topic advert.
> >
> >and
> >gra...@dsl.ca (Graydon Saunders) writes:
> >
> >>Which means you have absolutely no excuse for posting that ad.
> >>
> >>You've just permanently lost at least one potential customer, and
> >>converted them into someone with a strong preference for seeing your
> >>publications fail.
> >
> >Jesus Christ. Sometimes fen can be some of the most pedantic little fuckers in
> >the known universe.
> >
> >EXPLAIN what he did wrong before pulling out the insults and bullshit about
> >"protecting" the ng's integrity. This kind of piss-ant bullyboy attitude is
> >FAR more damaging to the integrity of this community than a single mistake by a
> >known entity. It's not like we don't know where he lives if he repeats the
> >mistake and we need to go beat him with the rubber hoses.
>
> He posted his ad to several newsgroups which had two things in common
> -- they're related to sf, and they're not supposed to get ads.
>
> He doesn't seem to be very forgiving when other people do things he
> considers to be mistakes.
>
>
one was offered.
Dan Goodman
Sorry -- I missed that!
Perhaps some others did also. Or perhaps not. There are two people
who will not, in their current lifetimes, forgive me for things they
_think_ I did in the 1970's.
Forrest
>I didn't realize that people would take it this way. I won't do
>it again.
I was hoping you'd offer free trials to Chronicle (which would
also have been more on-topic). AbsMag has a no-humor policy so I have
no interest in reading it (or submitting to it).
Michael Adams
news:3A92A41C...@knutsen.dk...
>
> Warren has made two mistakes and apologized for one. Have I
> made any?
Yes. You have. For instance, let's take the original charge of posting of
the ad, which pertained to the USA, in a "international" newsgroup.
Bingo! This IS an international newsgroup--talking about the USA ain't
prohibited. Nor is talking about any OTHER country prohibited!
--
Michael Adams, Editor, The SF Commentary Site--
http://www.mindspring.com/~sfcommentator/index.html
Email: art...@bellsouth.net
Paul J Melko
is funny and of interest to SF writers.
Paul
Warren Lapine & Angela Kessler
bct...@hotmail.com says...
a solid SF story, I'll buy it. There's an absolutely brilliant funny SF
story in the current issue of Absolute Magnitude. The reason I say no
funny SF is that half of my slush pile was full of "Funny SF"
unfortunately almost none of it was funny. This cuts down on the
submissions, but if you want to try something funny on me, it will be
read. Though, anyone out there with a market report please don't report
this.
I was planning to do the same kind of offer with Chronicle at some point,
but considering the reaction I probably won't now.
Forrest
>The reason I say no
>funny SF is that half of my slush pile was full of "Funny SF"
>unfortunately almost none of it was funny.
What sort of funny was it failing at?
Lawrence Watt-Evans
Presumably, the sort that evokes laughter.
If I had to guess, I would guess that he was getting lots of stories
predicated on the assumption that stupidity, booze, drugs,
unpronounceable names, bad puns, breaking the fourth wall,
"politically correct" terminology, and/or exaggeration are inherently
funny.
--
The Misenchanted Page: http://www.sff.net/people/LWE/ Last update 1/29/01
My latest novel is NIGHT OF MADNESS
Zeborah
> "Anne M. Marble" wrote:
>
> > Well, gee. As I hope to contribute to at least one of his publications
> > some day, and as I happen to _like_ Science Fiction Chronicle, I really
>
> I'm not sure I'd dare submit anything, since this Warren fellow
> seems to be unaware of the existence of a world outside of the
> United States of America.
I think that's a bit unfair: it's clear he knows because he said
specifically that the deal didn't apply out of the US. The real worry
would be if he *hadn't* said that, but when faced with requests from the
likes of you and me suddenly refused.
But it is a shame he didn't consider an option whereby us poor furriners
could just pay for the postage, or some such. Dunno whether I'd
necessarily take him up on something like that (I don't think I'm really
a short story writer, except in fanfic, so I don't need to check out
markets) but the thought would have been there.
Zeborah
--
Gravity is no joke.
http://www.crosswinds.net/~zeborahnz
Lawrence Watt-Evans
wrote:
>But it is a shame he didn't consider an option whereby us poor furriners
>could just pay for the postage, or some such. Dunno whether I'd
>necessarily take him up on something like that (I don't think I'm really
>a short story writer, except in fanfic, so I don't need to check out
>markets) but the thought would have been there.
You could ask him. He might well be willing to do it.
But since the postage would work out to about $16.00 U.S., I doubt
many people would consider it worthwhile.
Warren Lapine & Angela Kessler
bct...@hotmail.com says...
laugh.
Warren Lapine & Angela Kessler
zeb...@altavista.com says...
be out of line. I thought the free part wouldn't be out of line.
Vera Nazarian
<nims...@uswest.net> wrote:
>On Sun, 18 Feb 2001 22:55:13 -0500, in message
><MPG.14fa63315...@news.i-plus.net>
> Warren Lapine & Angela Kessler <dnapubl...@iname.com>
>excited the ether to say:
>
>>DNA Publications is now offering a free two issue trial subscription to
>
>I'd hate to think that your participation has all been a lead-up
>to posting a freaking off-topic advert.
>
>--
>Doug Wickstrom
>"I tend to feel irritated when someone else turns out to know a fact I thought
>only I knew--like invasion of private territory." --Isaac Asimov
Awwww.....
Now *look* what you people made me do.
I come here *all the way* from SFF Net, because of what I've heard is
going on here on r.a.sf.c, namely, that Warren Lapine is being given a
hard time for making a mistake of posting an "off topic" ad.
Folks. My dear friends (to whom I've never talked to in my life as
yet, but I still feel this great warm flush of affinity for all of you
*grin*) --
*friends* -- let's give Warren a break.
Please.
And let me explain to you why.
Warren Lapine runs DNA Publications, which consists of about 90% of
the best semi-pro and a couple of pro publications in the SF genre.
Over the last year or so, he has increased circulation of his
magazines, in a genre where *all the other* major magazines have
*decreased* circulation.
DNA Publications has acquired and rescued markets for your and my
stories. They have increased exposure, paid decent pro or near-pro
rates to writers, ran some solid marketing and promotional campaigns,
and have very ethically decided *not* to review any of their *own*
magazines in SF Chronicle, to avoid even the slightest appearance of a
conflict of interest.
In short, Warren and his company are decent folks who are trying their
darndest to make good things happen for all of us -- and they are
being FAIR about it.
So, how about we be fair back? We as writers, we as consumers, all
benefit from the exitence of SF Chronicle, Absolute Magnitude, Dreams
of Decadence, Weird Tales, Fantastic, and -- did I forget something,
Warren?
Anyway... whatever.
My point is, so, he made an ad-post which included a free offer to US
residents, yadda yadda.
He screwed up.
He said he is sorry.
Let's be nice, okay? Please, I am asking you, pretty please, give him
a break. He didn't mean it in a bad way.
I forgive him in a flash. (And no, no one told me to come and defend
him, I just think Warren is an admirable guy who deserves better.)
Fair enough?
*smile*
--
~ Vera Imagine a world without color...
LORDS OF RAINBOW, an epic fantasy first novel.
DREAMS OF THE COMPASS ROSE, a "hybrid" short story collection,
Both coming soon from Wildside Press in 2001.
(trade paperback & hardcover)
Vera Nazarian
wrote:
>Which means you have absolutely no excuse for posting that ad.
Graydon, why? I honestly don't understand why this is such an
unforgivable crime, especially from someone whom most people know as a
legitimate well-meaning guy.
>You've just permanently lost at least one potential customer, and
>converted them into someone with a strong preference for seeing your
>publications fail.
Wow.
Well, if in about a couple of years Warren is the *only* SF genre
market source out there, does that mean that you would want the whole
genre to fail, in short fiction form? I mean, things are certainly
seeming to head in that direction, sandly enough. Markets are
shrinking -- all except for DNA Publications-owned ones.
Think about what this means. It makes me really sad for all of us who
love and care about the future of speculative fiction.
Vera Nazarian
wrote:
>Make that *two*. He posts an ad in a non-commercial newsgroup, but
>not only that, it is an ad which is only of interest to the citizens
>of one specific country. In an *international* newsgroup.
>
>--
>Peter Knutsen
Friend -- he is only human, and his funds are limited. I am betting
that if individual people from outside the USA offered to pay for
postage he would be willing to accommodate.
Heck, I'd be happy to pay for *your* postage, if it means helping out.
Vera Nazarian
>He posted his ad to several newsgroups which had two things in common
>-- they're related to sf, and they're not supposed to get ads.
Dan, he obviously didn't realize the extent of the problem it would
cause.
>He doesn't seem to be very forgiving when other people do things he
>considers to be mistakes.
I dunno. I've seen Warren be pretty open-minded and willing to talk
about things. Of course I haven't been on USENET for months, so I am
probably missing some specifics here, so forgive me for that (you'd
have to fill me in. I just downloaded 5,000 headers and there's no
frigging way I am reading all of them. *grin*).
And I really hate to see him get all this negativity back. These are
hard times, and there are some New Rules brewing in the wonderful
world of publishing. To survive, it is sometimes necessary to break
the Old Rules, if the end result justifies it.
Incidentally, is there an FAQ about not advertizing in this ng? If
there is, he may have missed it.
Ian A. York
Vera Nazarian <vera.naza...@sff.net> wrote:
>
>I come here *all the way* from SFF Net, because of what I've heard is
>going on here on r.a.sf.c, namely, that Warren Lapine is being given a
>hard time for making a mistake of posting an "off topic" ad.
In other words, you have no idea of what the culture is here, and don't
really believe there is one, and are condescending to lecture people about
something you don't understand.
What ignorance! What arrogance!
>Folks. My dear friends (to whom I've never talked to in my life as
>yet, but I still feel this great warm flush of affinity for all of you
>*grin*) --
How odd. I'm feeling a great flush of dislike for you, a school-marmish
prig with a V-shaped smile, smirking and prancing in front of a classroom
that only exists in your mind and, raising your index finger in the air,
preparing to lecture on a subject you know nothing about.
>So, how about we be fair back? We as writers, we as consumers, all
You know, a competent writer would have known that this sort of post is
probably the worst thing you could do for Warren, pretty much guaranteed
to raise hackles and anger people. A competent writer could have written
something that didn't scream of condescension. A competent writer would
have researched her subject for more than 5 seconds. I don't know your
writing, but I know now what kind of writer you are.
Fortunately for Warren, I'm going to assume that you have nothing to do
with him, but that you are merely as pushy as you are arrogant; that you
are one of those people who feels nothing works properly until you've
shoved (pinky raised, and loudly pointing to your contribution) your own
stick into the spokes, and then stood back and explained how everyone else
caused the crash, and if only they'd listened to you -- !
The other explanation is that you work for the competition, and are
deliberately trying to sabotage him, but from the evidence I don't think
you're that smart.
Note, by the way--for some people I feel I have to make things
explicit--that this is aimed directly at you, not Warren. If you are
capable of learning, think about that.
Anna Feruglio Dal Dan
> I come here *all the way* from SFF Net, because of what I've heard is
> going on here on r.a.sf.c, namely, that Warren Lapine is being given a
> hard time for making a mistake of posting an "off topic" ad.
This is a nice group, with a very low flame quotient, and since you are
a writer, it may interest you to participate. I know I've found it very
helpful.
But like most communities it has its hot buttons, and it's no use
demanding that it hasn't. A regular poster could very well try to defuse
a situation, or even argue about the justification for reacting so
strongly - but somebody who only comes here to give lessons, and not to
participate, may have the best of intentions (as I think you do) but is
likely to cause more harm than good.
--
cut out the attention to mail me
Anna F. Dal Dan
http://www.fantascienza.net/sfpeople/elethiomel
Michael Adams
the end coming up on me! The newsgroup will detoriorate! Usenet as a whole
shall snap under the load. Soon, everyone who posts in this newsgroup shall
feel compelled to post ads. I can see it now: some of our most respected
members posting things like, "MAKE LESS MONEY FASTER! FREE IF YOU PAY $300!"
every night and every day, because early in their mental childhood, they saw
one, singular, ad.
But this ad, I know, it was worse than all the crazed, crossposted spam
around. Because, let me tell you, this ad came from a known entity!
I feel faint now, just thinking about it...
Michael dot Grant
>
> Usenet is a many-to-many medium, necessarily and inherently;
> attempting to use it as a one-to-many broadcast medium breaks it.
>
> Advertisers are much of _why_ usenet feeds are so flakely these days;
> running a news server has become much more difficult when there's an
> enormous percentage of extraneous volume to filter and throw away.
>
> I am entirely aware that Warren didn't spam; advertising, _especially_
> 'relevant' advertising, is still not forgivable, because the cost of
> the ad is pushed on to the recipients of the ad; the system isn't
> stable with _any_ ads in it.
What is this about stability? The End is Not Nigh.
And I'm sure the binaries newsgroups contribute far more to
Information Superhighway traffic gridlock than adverts do.
I didn't want to get involved in this; but I do feel I have to
register my feeling that though Warren sinned, he did not do so
badly. I'm far more worried at Graydon's attitude than what
Warren did.
Probably the best thing he ought to have done was to have buried
his advert in the .sig of a post on another topic -- which is,
after all, still an advert, yet practised by Jo and Brenda and
others, and has not yet caused the collapse of
rec.arts.sf.composition.
Oh, excuse me, I have to go. There's a barbarian at the gate.
(Just one.) Probably he doesn't know how to work the doorbell.
Robert B. Marks
news:slrn99a40t....@localhost.localdomain...
> On Thu, 22 Feb 2001 08:03:11 GMT, Vera Nazarian
> <vera.naza...@sff.net> scripsit:
> >Well, if in about a couple of years Warren is the *only* SF genre
> >market source out there, does that mean that you would want the whole
> >genre to fail, in short fiction form?
>
>
> Usenet is much more important to me than short sf markets are.
I don't usually get involved in threads like this, but this one was
absolutely shocking to me.
(I am trying to pick my words very carefully, so that I don't end up just
posting a mindless flame.)
I believe you REALLY have to re-think your priorities. I also think that if
you want to be a professional in this field, you are going to have to make a
much greater effort to understand the importance of the SF short story
market. In a genre that has been filled of late by
lowest-common-denominator series with volumes large enough to sink the
Titanic, short story magazines are some of the few places left where readers
can read and writers can place stories for the higher common denominator.
Considering that authors like myself (and yes, I am now an author; my first
book came out in October, and can be found on the Simon & Schuster website)
learned how to be concise from writing short stories, the medium, even in
this day of the novel, is still incredibly important. Without magazines
such as Weird Tales, Absolute Magnitude, and F&SF, it is quite possible that
the SF short story will die.
Speaking as a professional writer, I would much rather see Usenet filled
with spam than see half of my genre go down in smoke. Quite frankly, the
genre is more important.
Graydon, I think you have some serious thinking to do. And, if you happen
to be at Ad Astra this weekend, do me a favour: avoid my Saturday reading
and my Sunday signing...I really don't think I want you near me at this
convention after your comments here.
Best regards to all,
Robert Marks
--
"There are more things in Heaven and Hell than any mortal man
could dream."
- From Demonsbane
Current: Demonsbane; Pocket Books
http://www.angelfire.com/scifi/delric
Ian A. York
Robert B. Marks <Del...@iStar.SPAMBLOCKER.HERE.ca> wrote:
>
>I don't usually get involved in threads like this, but this one was
>absolutely shocking to me.
It's really shocking to me, too, that you advocate destroying one of the
most valuable writers' resources on the 'net, just for the sake of a bit
of marketing that could be done anywhere. I'd go so far as to say
"disgusting". R.a.sf.c. is and has been an immensely useful source of
advice, inspiration, and discussion; it's useful *because* of the strict
no-marketing ethos here. Graydon is absolutely correct: marketing kills
newsgroups. This newsgroup is far more valuable than any one person's
marketing.
>I believe you REALLY have to re-think your priorities. I also think that if
I believe you have re-think *your* priorities. I'm utterly disgusted at
your attitude here: your complete selfishness in demanding that other
people lose their tools in exchange for your own trivial desires.
Again--this is you, not Warren, who has shown he doesn't hold the rest of
the world in the same contempt as you do.
>you want to be a professional in this field, you are going to have to make a
>much greater effort to understand the importance of the SF short story
>market. In a genre that has been filled of late by
Drop the condescension, and try to learn something.
>learned how to be concise from writing short stories, the medium, even in
Thousands of writers and aspiring writers learn far more than that from
reading rec.arts.sf.composition. If it comes down to relative values,
there's no comparison in my mind.
I'll skip lightly over the fact that you're making a class error--perhaps
deliberately, or perhaps because you've blinded yourself with greed, or
perhaps because you're simply not interested in other peoples' views, or,
most likely, because you simply don't understand the situation and can't
be bothered to try to understand it--in conflating "value of short
stories" with "advertising a semi-pro magazine".
>Speaking as a professional writer, I would much rather see Usenet filled
>with spam than see half of my genre go down in smoke. Quite frankly, the
>genre is more important.
My hands are shaking with rage here. What utter, unbelievable, arrogance!
What selfishness! What contempt for things you don't understand! What
intellectual laziness! What shart-sighted greed!
What a contemptible person you must be.
Philip M. Brewer
> How odd. I'm feeling a great flush of dislike for you, a school-marmish
> prig with a V-shaped smile, smirking and prancing in front of a classroom
> that only exists in your mind and, raising your index finger in the air,
> preparing to lecture on a subject you know nothing about.
I found this crude trashing of Vera far more offensive than the basenote
advertisement. It actually prompted me to do something I've never done
before--I searched my local server to see if I'd have missed anything worth
reading if I'd killfiled Ian A. York.
Besides the note I'm responding to here I found one irrelevant nit-pick, two
notes on the classification of types of spam, and one possibly-useful note
about writing. A pretty poor average for someone who is trying to tell other
people how to post.
For people who haven't been reading news as long as me, I thought I'd mention
that instant note also had follow-ups set to misc.test--an old tactic of
irresponsible flamers from usenet days of yore. So, if you responded and your
note hasn't shown up, that's probably why.
Marilee J. Layman
Nazarian) wrote:
>On Mon, 19 Feb 2001 01:00:58 -0600, Doug Wickstrom
><nims...@uswest.net> wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 18 Feb 2001 22:55:13 -0500, in message
>><MPG.14fa63315...@news.i-plus.net>
>> Warren Lapine & Angela Kessler <dnapubl...@iname.com>
>>excited the ether to say:
>>
>>>DNA Publications is now offering a free two issue trial subscription to
>>
>>I'd hate to think that your participation has all been a lead-up
>>to posting a freaking off-topic advert.
>>
>>--
>>Doug Wickstrom
>>"I tend to feel irritated when someone else turns out to know a fact I thought
>>only I knew--like invasion of private territory." --Isaac Asimov
>
>Awwww.....
>
>Now *look* what you people made me do.
>
>I come here *all the way* from SFF Net, because of what I've heard is
>going on here on r.a.sf.c, namely, that Warren Lapine is being given a
>hard time for making a mistake of posting an "off topic" ad.
Well, here's a problem. Whether you were summoned by Warren or read a
description of what happened and felt the need to rush to his defense,
it's still the wrong thing to do. You haven't posted here in a long
time, so showing up on the white horse is really inappropriate.
--
Marilee J. Layman The Other*Worlds*Cafe
HOSTE...@aol.com A Science Fiction Discussion Group.
AOL Keyword: OWC http://www.webmoose.com/owc
Robert B. Marks
news:973vce$lo6$1...@news.panix.com...
> In article <1Wel6.210944$Y.85...@news.total.net>,
> Robert B. Marks <Del...@iStar.SPAMBLOCKER.HERE.ca> wrote:
> >
> >I don't usually get involved in threads like this, but this one was
> >absolutely shocking to me.
>
> It's really shocking to me, too, that you advocate destroying one of the
> most valuable writers' resources on the 'net, just for the sake of a bit
> of marketing that could be done anywhere. I'd go so far as to say
> "disgusting". R.a.sf.c. is and has been an immensely useful source of
> advice, inspiration, and discussion; it's useful *because* of the strict
> no-marketing ethos here. Graydon is absolutely correct: marketing kills
> newsgroups. This newsgroup is far more valuable than any one person's
> marketing.
On the contrary, I merely state that the short story half of the SF market
is more important than a newsgroup. I did not talk about Warren Levine's
marketing at all.
> >I believe you REALLY have to re-think your priorities. I also think that
if
>
> I believe you have re-think *your* priorities. I'm utterly disgusted at
> your attitude here: your complete selfishness in demanding that other
> people lose their tools in exchange for your own trivial desires.
> Again--this is you, not Warren, who has shown he doesn't hold the rest of
> the world in the same contempt as you do.
The only way that somebody can interpret the statements I made that way is
if one assumes the worst and ignores most of what I wrote. And at no point
did I ever state or even suggest that I hold the rest of the world in
contempt; I was startled and trying to point out the flaw in ONE person's
philosophy, a flaw that would have placed a large part of the genre he
wishes to write in below a single electronic forum.
> >you want to be a professional in this field, you are going to have to
make a
> >much greater effort to understand the importance of the SF short story
> >market. In a genre that has been filled of late by
>
> Drop the condescension, and try to learn something.
>
> >learned how to be concise from writing short stories, the medium, even in
>
> Thousands of writers and aspiring writers learn far more than that from
> reading rec.arts.sf.composition. If it comes down to relative values,
> there's no comparison in my mind.
I think you are exagerating. On my server, I see around 288 messages, and
it appears that there are only about 30 or so regulars. Tell me, where are
these "thousands of writers and aspiring writers"?
I do not mean to denegrate those regulars here who are published and working
hard at becoming published; please do not take it that way. As a forum for
exchanging writing ideas, it is often a wonderful thing, and I do hope that
it is never destroyed by a flood of spammers. There are some very good pros
here, all of whom are credits to the field.
However, to be honest, I think that writer's workshops such as Clarion,
writer's circles, and mentoring serve a stronger instructional purpose than
rec.arts.sf.composition. I learned more at the hands of Julie Czerneda,
John Vornholt, and Dennis McKiernan than I ever learned while I was a
regular here.
> I'll skip lightly over the fact that you're making a class error--perhaps
> deliberately, or perhaps because you've blinded yourself with greed, or
> perhaps because you're simply not interested in other peoples' views, or,
> most likely, because you simply don't understand the situation and can't
> be bothered to try to understand it--in conflating "value of short
> stories" with "advertising a semi-pro magazine".
I think you should have read my post a bit more closely, and thought about
it before you replied.
I was talking to Graydon about the fact that he stated that if he had to
choose between usenet being filled with spam and having the SF short story
market crash and burn, he would have the SF short story market crash and
burn.
Loyalty to a newsgroup is admirable, but if one wishes to be a professional
writer, one must also have respect for his/her genre. Without that respect,
one is destined to failure.
> >Speaking as a professional writer, I would much rather see Usenet filled
> >with spam than see half of my genre go down in smoke. Quite frankly, the
> >genre is more important.
>
> My hands are shaking with rage here. What utter, unbelievable, arrogance!
> What selfishness! What contempt for things you don't understand! What
> intellectual laziness! What shart-sighted greed!
You know, I looked at your website. I found it very interesting that in
your publication credits, you don't list a single work of fiction. Just
about everything you've published has to do with the sciences, and is, in
fact, in academia, if I'm not mistaken.
I, on the other hand, am a published fantasy author, and I am held in good
standing by some of the best people in the field (such as Robert J. Sawyer
and Dennis McKiernan). I am a client of the Donald Maass Literary Agency,
and I will be applying for an associate membership of SFWA shortly. And, I
might add, I do make my living by my pen.
> What a contemptible person you must be.
Really? I think Robert Sawyer, Dennis McKiernan, Tad Williams, and Julie
Czerneda would all disagree with you. Aside from which, I have to wonder:
why, out of curiosity, did you set this message to reply automatically to
misc.test instead of to rec.arts.sf.composition? Now, somebody who draws
hasty conclusions would say that you are trying, by means of a dirty trick,
to get the last word in, but I'm not the sort to draw hasty conclusions...
So why did you do it?
Robert B. Marks
> On Thu, 22 Feb 2001 15:46:23 -0500, Robert B. Marks
> <Del...@iStar.SPAMBLOCKER.HERE.ca> scripsit:
> >I believe you REALLY have to re-think your priorities. I also think
> >that if you want to be a professional in this field, you are going to
> >have to make a much greater effort to understand the importance of
> >the SF short story market.
>
Considering how many of the best people in the field (Harlan Ellison, Isaac
Asimov, Ray Bradbury) started with short stories, and (those who are still
alive, at least) are continuing with these short stories, I really think you
should reconsider the nature of the SF short story market. It is not as low
as you might think.
> >In a genre that has been filled of late by
> >lowest-common-denominator series with volumes large enough to sink the
> >Titanic, short story magazines are some of the few places left where
readers
> >can read and writers can place stories for the higher common denominator.
>
> That would be news to Egan, Vinge, McLeod, Cherryh, Kay, Brust,
> McKillip...
I would add David Gemmell, Terry Pratchett, Robert Sawyer, and Dennis
McKiernan to that list.
The problem is that for every single good volume these authors put out,
there are at least three books put out that are for the lowest common
denominator. I can't count the number of times I have just wanted to scream
upon finding just about nothing worthwhile in the SF section in the
bookstore these days.
> Length isn't a measure of quality; it's a measure of length.
Although I note that many lowest common denominator series do have large
volumes (such as The Wheel of Time, or J.V. Jones latest, which I found to
be stuffed with filler), I do not mean to suggest that length is a measure
of quality.
Although, when somebody needs 200,000 words to tell a story that could be
told in 20,000 words, something is VERY wrong...
Michael Adams
> description of what happened and felt the need to rush to his defense,
> it's still the wrong thing to do. You haven't posted here in a long
> time, so showing up on the white horse is really inappropriate.
Wait a second: Posting your opinion is inappropiate, if you haven't posted
in a long time?
That does not make any sense. Admittedly, I didn't think much of the
white-horse approach either, but saying that one shouldn't post one's
opinion if one hasn't posted much lately doesn't make much sense--newbies
who post don't get bashed by reasonable people for being newbies, do they?
Lawrence Watt-Evans
wrote:
>1) Sturgeon's Law was coined when?
1962? I can't remember exactly.
Lawrence Watt-Evans
<mjla...@erols.com> wrote:
>Well, here's a problem. Whether you were summoned by Warren or read a
>description of what happened and felt the need to rush to his defense,
>it's still the wrong thing to do.
I would like to make clear, as a neutral party who read the
discussions both here and on SFF Net, that this was absolutely Vera's
own idea. Warren did not ask for nor encourage her to do anything of
the sort.
For that matter, it wasn't even Warren who was griping on SFF Net
about the way his announcement was received here; it was another
person entirely.
Please do not hold any of this, beyond the initial announcement,
against Warren. While he may have erred with his first post about the
offer (I'm not entirely convinced), he has tried not to compound it
and has not complained anywhere that I've seen. Had he wanted to
summon aid he could have had a swarm of eager young writers here, not
just Vera -- which probably _would_ make this group unusable.
I think he has more sense than that, and I hope you'd credit him with
more sense than that.
Robert B. Marks
> It's been steadily dying for a good thirty years now; there is no
> indication that it's not going to keep right on dying, because one can
> no longer make even the immitation of a living as a short story
> writer.
I think that would be an incredible surprise to Harlan Ellison, who is still
doing precisely that.
It would probably also be rather surprising to all those magazines that are
still out there and getting around 300 submissions per week.
> [books are too long, and too many of them are bad]
> >The problem is that for every single good volume these authors put
> >out, there are at least three books put out that are for the lowest
> >common denominator. I can't count the number of times I have just
> >wanted to scream upon finding just about nothing worthwhile in the SF
> >section in the bookstore these days.
>
> 1) Sturgeon's Law was coined when?
>
> 2) People are buying them.
Nobody ever said the lowest common denominator was SMALL...
Holly E. Ordway
>> Well, here's a problem. Whether you were summoned by Warren or
>> read a description of what happened and felt the need to rush to
>> his defense, it's still the wrong thing to do. You haven't posted
>> here in a long time, so showing up on the white horse is really
>> inappropriate.
>
>Wait a second: Posting your opinion is inappropiate, if you haven't
>posted in a long time?
The way I see it, the *inappropriate* bit was coming to a group that
you don't post in, and lecturing the inhabitants on proper manners.
It's the same reasoning that lies behind the general cross-newsgroup
consensus that it is rude to post a question to a newsgroup that you
don't read, asking people to reply by email since you won't be reading
the replies in the group. There is the expectation of participation in
the group.
--Holly
Richard Horton
wrote:
>60s, 40s, 40s, respectively; not even vaguely current market
>conditions.
Ob nitpick: 50s, 30s, 40s, for when Ellison, Asimov, Bradbury started
publishing.
Your point stands -- it is possible to get started in the field
nowadays without publishing short fiction -- it's even common, perhaps
more common than to get started by publishing short fiction.
I love short fiction, mind you -- and I don't by any means want Warren
to fail, and I think it's appalling to jump from quite properly
admonishing Warren for improperly posting an ad here -- we don't want
ads, and anyone who posts them anywhere but in a .sig must be
admonished posthaste -- to wishing for him to go out of business.
--
Rich Horton | Stable Email: mailto://richard...@sff.net
Home Page: http://www.sff.net/people/richard.horton
Also visit SF Site (http://www.sfsite.com) and Tangent Online (http://www.sfsite.com/tangent)
Warren Lapine & Angela Kessler
lawr...@clark.net says...
Thanks for posting that. For the record, I really enjoy the rec.arts
groups and I don't want to see this level of hostility continue. I'd
really like to see this thread die. I appreciate that people have come
to my defense, but it's time for this to end. I hope everyone will let
that happen.
Jim Bailey
>
>Look at the history of the formerly useful *.jobs newsgroups.
That's a slippery slope argument that doesn't hold much water. Usenet, while
under attack from several fronts, has pretty much gotten past the peak of the
overall threat. While individual groups *could* still go supercritical with
spam/trolls/flames, as long as there's a good core of members within each
community, it usually does ok. The rasf* groups in particular aren't overly
vulnerable because it IS more of a closed community, and there are many many
ties that bind it together outside of usenet.
This is why we argued so vehemently that rasf.comp get put in this hierarchy
instead of appended to misc.writing (the rational in the charter on this point
came from the wording of one of my posts summarizing the closeness of the
history of SF writing *with* and *from* fandom).
While I think saying magazines *need* to post notices around here is over the
top, it *is* part of the entire gestalt of how and why the overall community
remains vigorous -- there's a strong feedback mechanism between the producers
and the fans, and each affects the other in ways we both can and can't measure.
>Usenet is a many-to-many medium, necessarily and inherently;
>attempting to use it as a one-to-many broadcast medium breaks it.
Except that announcements and informational posts that do that are *always*
part of the mix. This same announcement, coming from a fellow writer telling
us how we can follow the oft-repeated advice of reading the markets, and do it
for free, would have been perfectly on topic. It would also have been a
one-to-many broadcast that shoots down your statement.
>Advertisers are much of _why_ usenet feeds are so flakely these days;
>running a news server has become much more difficult when there's an
>enormous percentage of extraneous volume to filter and throw away.
Yep, last I heard (almost 2 years ago now I think) 40% of usenet traffic was
spam. Another 40% was spam cancels.
>I am entirely aware that Warren didn't spam; advertising, _especially_
>'relevant' advertising, is still not forgivable, because the cost of
>the ad is pushed on to the recipients of the ad; the system isn't
>stable with _any_ ads in it.
Again, hyperbole. It's not stable if it's not "paid for" by somehow giving
something back to the larger community. Most of the time, this comes via
*authentic* participation. We know when somebody is playing the game of faking
it, and somebody who's sincere in their participation is going to be more aware
of how to not cross the line, or if they do, to take steps to not do it again
(like in this case). It can also be paid for by providing genuinely useful
information. In Warren's place, I would have specifically worded the post in
rasfc to mention the read-the-mag advice -- that would probably have been
enough to de-adify it for most people.
>Usenet is much more important to me than short sf markets are.
One person's take. Again, because of the feedback loop that exists in SF
fandom, you take away the short markets, and the whole rasf* hierarchy becomes
weaker, losing one of the common bonds tying it together, and thus making it at
least a bit more vulnerable to the death you so fear.
>short fiction <> speculative fiction
IMO, SF is the last viable refuge of a short-fiction tradition that *matters*.
It still has enough power through the messages and ideas expressed to influence
a lot of the novel-length work in the field, and the common coin of history
that makes the genre what it is comes from shorts as much as from novels. That
just doesn't happen any more in other areas of literature.
As one of the people who fought for the creation of rasfc, *I* say there's
still room for judgement calls to be made on this issue. Ellen Datlow for
instance, has made far more shameless plugs for her various projects over the
years, and the vast majority of us have been glad of it.
Right now, it's the intolerance that's more of a threat the rasfc's viability.
In the early years, I was able to convince people like Patricia Wrede to visit
from AOL just with a short note and a link. Now I need to actively work to
overcome peoples' fears about getting flamed, and it's *not* because of the
trolls or spammers, it's because of a sizable subset of the regulars. I
generally think that getting along on usenet, particularly rasf*, isn't as much
of a problem as people assume, but I'm beginning to reassess my position on
that, unfortunately.
I'll still support rasfc as a community and work to defend its health, though,
because I have a vested interest in how it fares. S'all I can do.
Best,
Jim Bailey
Robert B. Marks
> On Thu, 22 Feb 2001 20:50:35 -0500,
> >news:slrn99bcsq....@localhost.localdomain...
> >> It's been steadily dying for a good thirty years now; there is no
> >> indication that it's not going to keep right on dying, because one can
> >> no longer make even the immitation of a living as a short story
> >> writer.
> >
> >I think that would be an incredible surprise to Harlan Ellison, who is
still
> >doing precisely that.
>
> stories?
And the royalties that result, as I understand it. Then there are film
rights, anthology publications, etc. But, at the heart of it all is his
short fiction, as a survey of his most recent publications will show. Mind
you, I am not Harlan Ellison, and I may very well be wrong.
Still, in the modern day and age, being a professional short story author is
VERY difficult. That does not make it impossible, though...
> >It would probably also be rather surprising to all those magazines that
are
> >still out there and getting around 300 submissions per week.
>
> Submissions <> sales; Warren was himself commenting on that.
The point is that the publications are sometimes quite swamped; the writers
are out there, and lots of short stories are being written.
(The estimate I use for the rejection rate of short stories is around 99%,
just from sheer competition.)
> The lowest common denominator is by definition the smallest
> denominator available.
Er...where did you get that definition?
It probably works for mathematics, but I'm not using a mathematical
definition. The definition I'm using (and your use of the mathematical
definition is the first time I have ever seen it used in this context)
refers to quality of the work and the target audience.
I suppose that you could put it in terms of reading level. The "lowest
common denominator" here refers to those who are reading at something just
below a high school graduate level. These people will not necessarily
understand heavy philosophical issues, nor will they understand neat
linguistic jokes a la Tolkien, or the more refined metaphors. Books
targeted to this audience can be read and understood by those at just about
any reading level, and thus the readership for these sorts of books is very
large, as these sorts of books can appeal to the entire spectrum of readers.
On the other hand, books targeted for the "highest common denominator" often
have a heavy literary, philosophical, linguistic, and mythological content.
Because they require one to be a refined and informed reader, they do not
appeal to a wide audience, as those at a lower reading level find themselves
lost while reading them. Hence, they don't make as much money, and
publishers don't buy as many of them.
But that's the basic definition as far as readerships go, at least in the
circles that I travel. You could picture it as a pyramid, with the lowest
common denominator on the bottom with the widest readership, and the highest
common denominator at the top, with very little readership.
Although somebody like Patrick Neilsen Hayden would have to confirm this, it
is my impression that most publishing houses use those authors who appeal to
the lowest common denominator as their "A" list, and place the authors who
appeal to a higher common denominator in the midlist.
Marilee J. Layman
<art...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>> Well, here's a problem. Whether you were summoned by Warren or read a
>> description of what happened and felt the need to rush to his defense,
>> it's still the wrong thing to do. You haven't posted here in a long
>> time, so showing up on the white horse is really inappropriate.
>
>Wait a second: Posting your opinion is inappropiate, if you haven't posted
>in a long time?
>
>That does not make any sense. Admittedly, I didn't think much of the
>white-horse approach either, but saying that one shouldn't post one's
>opinion if one hasn't posted much lately doesn't make much sense--newbies
>who post don't get bashed by reasonable people for being newbies, do they?
It's not that she's a newbie, after all, she's not, but that she isn't
here commenting on ongoing stuff, just riding in to right wrongs.
Vera Nazarian
<pbr...@bluestem.prairienet.org> wrote:
>Ian A. York <iay...@panix.com> wrote:
>
>> How odd. I'm feeling a great flush of dislike for you, a school-marmish
>> prig with a V-shaped smile, smirking and prancing in front of a classroom
>> that only exists in your mind and, raising your index finger in the air,
>> preparing to lecture on a subject you know nothing about.
Wow, I never saw the original post of Ian that Philip quoted!
This is seriously amusing, I like it! LOL!
Philip, would you be so kind as to repost his post in full so that I
can respond to it?
Otherwise I am afraid I will have to piggyback off your post for this
(hope you don't mind just this once, thanks.)
In any case, Ian has a pretty good flair with words, and his
description of what I appear to him like is kinda Very Qool. I might
even use it in my sig file. :-) Vera, a School-Marmish Prig.
ROFL!
Ian (and everyon else) : here is what I look like, if you want to see
my daily journal:
http://www.sff.net/people/vera.nazarian/news.htp
And another pic here:
http://www.sff.net/people/vera.nazarian/vera.jpg
I am often told I look like Mrs. Santa Claus. :-) But you Did Good --
very quaint and Harry Potteresque imaginary description of me.
*grin*
Seriously, I may have come across as a schoolmarmy, but that's because
last night I was Annoyed (TM) at the situation. And when I am
annoyed, I tend to sound like God. :-)
>I found this crude trashing of Vera far more offensive than the basenote
>advertisement. It actually prompted me to do something I've never done
>before--I searched my local server to see if I'd have missed anything worth
>reading if I'd killfiled Ian A. York.
Dear Philip, thank you for your kind defense of me, I appreciate it,
friend. But really I am not offended at all. I am still chuckling
here... :-)
>Besides the note I'm responding to here I found one irrelevant nit-pick, two
>notes on the classification of types of spam, and one possibly-useful note
>about writing. A pretty poor average for someone who is trying to tell other
>people how to post.
>
>For people who haven't been reading news as long as me, I thought I'd mention
>that instant note also had follow-ups set to misc.test--an old tactic of
>irresponsible flamers from usenet days of yore. So, if you responded and your
>note hasn't shown up, that's probably why.
That might explain why I dont see the original main post?
Hmmmm. Curioser and curiouser. :-)
Vera Nazarian
<s_wi...@earthling.net> wrote:
>Vera,
>
>yes, Warren was given a hard time. He apologized. Most people said
>'fine, don't do it again' and most was well. Oh, except for the
>people who felt that he was jumped on too hard and the few people who
>felt that he wasn't truly sorry.
>
>You then proceed to post four times saying the exact same thing,
>seemingly unaware of the history of the thread and that the issue was
>mostly over. Until you brought it back by castigating a group of
>people who you don't know for doing something you heard about 3rd hand
>in a discussion forum where you don't know the culture.
Dear SW,
I was responding to 4 different Warren-accusatory posts, and I
actually said 4 *variations* on the same thing, which had new points
to add in each case.
But you are absolutely right, I *have* forgotten the culture of this
particular newsgroup (it's been ages since I was a USENET regular),
and you are humbly asked to forgive my excited state last night.
As for castigating, I was refuting. There is a semantic difference
there, and my only intention was to disagree, not "punish" (which
"castigate" means).
>(I've now posted on this subject three times in one week, so this will
>be my last on why advertising in ngs is bad)
Fair enough.
>On Thu, 22 Feb 2001 08:13:52 GMT, vera.naza...@sff.net (Vera
>Nazarian) wrote:
>>And I really hate to see him get all this negativity back. These are
>>hard times, and there are some New Rules brewing in the wonderful
>>world of publishing. To survive, it is sometimes necessary to break
>>the Old Rules, if the end result justifies it.
>
>no. because the end result is that usenet is open to everyone who has
>a really great idea for making money or cheating taxes or is offering
>cheap viagra or has this reeeeely kewl ezine and won't you look at my
>great book _attack of the stereotypical greys with a corny name_..
Actually, it is important to draw the line as to where ads arre
allowed or not, and yet be flexible with where that particular line is
drawn. This is all shades of grey and not black and white.
>>Incidentally, is there an FAQ about not advertizing in this ng? If
>>there is, he may have missed it.
>
>not advertising is *default* in ngs.
Sorry to disagree, but I have found your FAQ in fact, and here is what
it says regarding advertizing:
http://www.faqs.org/faqs/writing/sf-composition/
QUOTE:
2.3 Advertising
As stated in the charter, overt advertising is excluded from
the group; if you wish to promote your work, your services or
your products, please leave only a very brief message with
minimal marketese. That is, while "My new book is on the
shelves! Anyone seen it?" or "I've a program I think might
be useful to writers: blah blah blah for more information,
see the following URL:" is generally tolerable, long ads or
extremely non-relevant posts or posts filled with hyperbole
will likely get flamed.
The charter deliberately leaves the matter vague--it is up
to the group participants to determine what level of advertising
is acceptable. While one can probably expect the posters (by
and large, at least) to be reasonable, tread the line
carefully. There -is- such a thing as bad publicity.
I had a great example of an ad, but I seem to have misplaced it.
I'll put it in here, if I locate it again.
END QUOTE
As you can see, the FAQX makes it into a hazy area, and gives all of
us here leeway to "forgive" certain kinds of very light very
small-scale advertising.
Vera Nazarian
Feruglio Dal Dan) wrote:
>Vera Nazarian <vera.naza...@sff.net> wrote:
>
>> I come here *all the way* from SFF Net, because of what I've heard is
>> going on here on r.a.sf.c, namely, that Warren Lapine is being given a
>> hard time for making a mistake of posting an "off topic" ad.
>
>This is a nice group, with a very low flame quotient, and since you are
>a writer, it may interest you to participate. I know I've found it very
>helpful.
Thanks for the good suggestion, Anna. I will try to stick around and
see what goes on here, without stirring the waters too much. :-)
>But like most communities it has its hot buttons, and it's no use
>demanding that it hasn't. A regular poster could very well try to defuse
>a situation, or even argue about the justification for reacting so
>strongly - but somebody who only comes here to give lessons, and not to
>participate, may have the best of intentions (as I think you do) but is
>likely to cause more harm than good.
And in this you are correct. However, I had to start somewhere, I
guess, and here I am. :-)
And thanks again for your kind comments.
Warren Lapine & Angela Kessler
Okay, the opinion I am about to share is most definitely biased, as I own
about half of the short markets out there, but here goes. Short fiction
has always been the lifeblood of SF. That has not changed, though, I do
see how those who aren't paying close attention could managed to miss
that. Yes, many of the short fiction markets have been shrinking, but so
have the sales of paperback novels. In both cases, this has more to do
with the change in distribution channels than in the literary merit of
the forms. One argument I've heard used to denigrate the short form has
been this, "If the short form is so good, then why has Analog and
Asimov's been sold so many times." Whenever I hear that I just shake my
head. The reality is that on more than one occasion these magazines were
sold because their parent companies got into financial trouble and those
two magazine were the only magazines that they had that were worth
anything, so they sold them to get the money to bail the company out.
Now here's why the short form is vitally important to the field. It has
always been in the short form that the majority of innovations have come.
Why is that? Simple: the risk factors. Each book must stand on it's own
sales. If a book editor take a lot of risks with novels that are strange
and innovative but ultimately don't sell, they won't be employed all that
long. So book publishing is necessarily more conservative. At a
magazine, if something comes in that is wild and different the editor
doesn't have as much at stake. Fist off, the readership is already
signed up for the next year, and secondly it's only one story. So even
if the bulk of the readership ultimately hates that story, if they are
happy with the rest of the issue, no real harm has been done to the
magazine. Now when an innovative story hits, it has the potential of
changing the field. If the short markets disappear, SF will become an
even more conservative field. My fear is that it would stagnate into
something that would eventually become unreadable.
Heather Anne Nicoll
> I was talking to Graydon about the fact that he stated that if he had to
> choose between usenet being filled with spam and having the SF short story
> market crash and burn, he would have the SF short story market crash and
> burn.
>
> Loyalty to a newsgroup is admirable, but if one wishes to be a professional
> writer, one must also have respect for his/her genre. Without that respect,
> one is destined to failure.
I commend to you Russ Allbery's Rant.
http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/writing/rant.html
The functionality of usenet has not only brought me into the SF
community, helped me fix an infodump, introduced me to an editor who
doesn't frighten me, and given me the courage to actually send my work
out into the world -- it has directly and causally led to me getting
published for the first time (and I have my comp copies now!), and has
directly and causally led to a number of valuable friendships and one
intended life-partnership. /To me/, this is worth far more than the
short story market, _and I write short stories_.
(I do want to add that, although I snipped the resume-measuring contest
and judiciously removed my response to same as overly catty, I must
point out that "Mine is bigger than his!" isn't a line that works so
well.)
--
Heather Nicoll - Darkhawk - http://aelfhame.net/~darkhawk/
To love and to honour; to kick and to bite. . . .
-- Oingo Boingo, "Helpless"
Lawrence Watt-Evans
<Del...@iStar.SPAMBLOCKER.HERE.ca> wrote:
>Graydon Saunders <gra...@dsl.ca> wrote in message
>news:slrn99bnqe....@localhost.localdomain...
>> On Thu, 22 Feb 2001 20:50:35 -0500,
>> Robert B. Marks <Del...@iStar.SPAMBLOCKER.HERE.ca> scripsit:
>> >Graydon Saunders <gra...@dsl.ca> wrote in message
>> >news:slrn99bcsq....@localhost.localdomain...
>
>Still, in the modern day and age, being a professional short story author is
>VERY difficult. That does not make it impossible, though...
>
>> >It would probably also be rather surprising to all those magazines that
>are
>> >still out there and getting around 300 submissions per week.
>>
>> Submissions <> sales; Warren was himself commenting on that.
>
>The point is that the publications are sometimes quite swamped; the writers
>are out there, and lots of short stories are being written.
Well, no. What you've demonstrated is that there are people _trying
unsuccessfully_ to write short stories.
I wish I could remember the source of this anecdote, but I don't, so
I'll just leave it anonymous:
A new editor started on his job at the bottom rung, reading slush, and
was appalled. After about a week on the job, a friend came to visit
the office and looked around at the stacks and stacks of manila
envelopes. He picked a few up and said wonderingly, "Just think,
there's a story in each of these!"
The editor replied, "God, I _wish_ there were!"
Most slush is not stories. It is, in my daughter's usage, storylike
objects.
>(The estimate I use for the rejection rate of short stories is around 99%,
>just from sheer competition.)
Most of it is from sheer lousiness.
At any rate, the demand among writers for short story _markets_ is
huge. The demand among _readers_ for short fiction is quite small
these days, and fed largely by theme anthologies.
Marc Brutschy
>Still, in the modern day and age, being a professional short story author is
>VERY difficult. That does not make it impossible, though...
I heard someone say once that Howard Waldrop was making a living
selling short fiction. I can't remember how long ago I heard this, but
I was wondering... has anyone else heard that?
Marc Brutschy
(always hoping *someone* out there is making a living with short
stories)
Jim Bailey
>groups and I don't want to see this level of hostility continue. I'd
>really like to see this thread die. I appreciate that people have come
>to my defense, but it's time for this to end. I hope everyone will let
>that happen.
My apologies, Warren, for helping keep this stirred up. Tho for the record on
this side, I didn't necessarily oppose the objections, just the manner in which
they were expressed (sorry <g>). My opinion is that you didn't cross the line,
but there are arguments for the opposing side, and it's something that does
need to be discussed from time to time. Not too long ago, your post wouldn't
have made even a ripple. Newsgroups evolve.
I'm probably partially posting on this topic out of guilt for not speaking up
during a similar recent thread regarding another operation, a long-time (14
years now) e-zine DargonZine, which had asked permission to post announcements
here during the early days of the newsgroup, and which had been given that
permission by a few of us at the time. Since I was one of those, and a similar
amount of nastiness was pointed at them, I should have mentioned the history so
that the discussion could have been about revoking previously *explicit*
permission to post, rather than about whether they were interlopers abusing the
ng.
And as I posted in my own sff-net newsgroup, I'm also mildly depressed about
how a pattern of incidents, of which this example is just a *small* piece, is
undercutting the whole genre. Time to let this part of it fade away, though.
Best,
Jim Bailey
Monissa
<art...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>> Well, here's a problem. Whether you were summoned by Warren or read a
>> description of what happened and felt the need to rush to his defense,
>> it's still the wrong thing to do. You haven't posted here in a long
>> time, so showing up on the white horse is really inappropriate.
>
>Wait a second: Posting your opinion is inappropiate, if you haven't posted
>in a long time?
Oops. I better make sure I don't have any opinions* then ;) I think I
stopped posting here soon after the group started.Unreliable newsfeeds
(I'd neve see replies ot me but sometimes I'd find a reply to a reply
to reply grrrr) and then the next ISP used to mix up headers & bodies
when it even bothered to connect.
So I've had to be content with occasional reads of the group. But now,
assuming this post sends OK, I think I have a reliable news server so
I get to play. Hmmmm. Let's see...
(And hello too)
Monissa
*think I'm safe, no real opinions in that
Frank
<brut...@home.com.nospam> wrote:
>"Robert B. Marks" <Del...@iStar.SPAMBLOCKER.HERE.ca> wrote:
>
>>Still, in the modern day and age, being a professional short story author is
>>VERY difficult. That does not make it impossible, though...
>
>I heard someone say once that Howard Waldrop was making a living
>selling short fiction. I can't remember how long ago I heard this, but
>I was wondering... has anyone else heard that?
It's true, but not many people would be willing to live on what
Waldrop lives on. He cannot afford a phone, and I think a significant
part of his diet comes from fish that he catches himself.
Frank
<Del...@iStar.SPAMBLOCKER.HERE.ca> wrote:
>Graydon Saunders <gra...@dsl.ca> wrote in message
>news:slrn99bnqe....@localhost.localdomain...
>> Harlan's primary income comes from sale of publishing rights to short
>> stories?
>
>And the royalties that result, as I understand it. Then there are film
>rights, anthology publications, etc. But, at the heart of it all is his
>short fiction, as a survey of his most recent publications will show. Mind
>you, I am not Harlan Ellison, and I may very well be wrong.
It's also possible that Ellison derives significant income from
sources like consulting for Hollywood, and investment income derived
from previous earnings.
Vlatko Juric-Kokic
Nazarian) wrote:
>That is, while "My new book is on the
>shelves! Anyone seen it?" or "I've a program I think might
>be useful to writers: blah blah blah for more information,
>see the following URL:" is generally tolerable, long ads or
>extremely non-relevant posts or posts filled with hyperbole
>will likely get flamed.
>
>The charter deliberately leaves the matter vague--it is up
>to the group participants to determine what level of advertising
>is acceptable. While one can probably expect the posters (by
>and large, at least) to be reasonable, tread the line
>carefully. There -is- such a thing as bad publicity.
>
>As you can see, the FAQX makes it into a hazy area, and gives all of
>us here leeway to "forgive" certain kinds of very light very
>small-scale advertising.
If I may point out, 'small-scale advertising' doesn't exactly mean
what was said in the first paragraph.
Sometimes even one-line ads* are going to get flamed and get annoyed
reactions. That's why it was said that the charter leaves the matter
vague.
*(I feel the urge to say "especially by people who don't participate
in the group", but it certainly doesn't describe Warren. Conditioning
from other situations.)
vlatko
--
_Neither Fish Nor Fowl_
http://www.webart.hr/nrnm/eng/index.htm
Interviews: Jo Walton, David Langford, Ken Macleod
vlatko.ju...@zg.hinet.hr
Anna Feruglio Dal Dan
> An ad. That doesn't appear to be crossposted. Oh no! Horrors! I think I feel
> the end coming up on me! The newsgroup will detoriorate! Usenet as a whole
> shall snap under the load. Soon, everyone who posts in this newsgroup shall
> feel compelled to post ads. I can see it now: some of our most respected
> members posting things like, "MAKE LESS MONEY FASTER! FREE IF YOU PAY $300!"
> every night and every day, because early in their mental childhood, they saw
> one, singular, ad.
>
> But this ad, I know, it was worse than all the crazed, crossposted spam
> around. Because, let me tell you, this ad came from a known entity!
>
> I feel faint now, just thinking about it...
Micheal, for the sake of me I can't see what this has to do with my
post. Was it just that you wanted to contributed and randomly chose to
attach your comment at this point in the thread, or is it something I
said? I'm perpelexed.
--
cut out the attention to mail me
Anna F. Dal Dan
http://www.fantascienza.net/sfpeople/elethiomel
Richard Horton
<brut...@home.com.nospam> wrote:
>"Robert B. Marks" <Del...@iStar.SPAMBLOCKER.HERE.ca> wrote:
>
>>Still, in the modern day and age, being a professional short story author is
>>VERY difficult. That does not make it impossible, though...
>
>I heard someone say once that Howard Waldrop was making a living
>selling short fiction. I can't remember how long ago I heard this, but
>I was wondering... has anyone else heard that?
I am given to understand that Waldrop makes a very marginal living, by
most of our standards.
I think it may be true that the bulk of Harlan Ellison's (probably
quite comfortable) income derives from his short fiction. But he's an
exception.
What really interests me are some of the older writers who wrote
almost exclusively short fiction, and who did not have "day jobs", and
who didn't really write that much or achieve that much popularity.
James Schmitz is one example. H. B. Fyfe is an even more obscure
example. How did they survive? (Their wives may have worked, is one
possibility.)
mary_...@cix.compulink.co.uk
Del...@iStar.SPAMBLOCKER.HERE.ca (Robert B. Marks) wrote:
<snip>
> Considering that authors like myself (and yes, I am now an
>author; my first book came out in October, and can be found
>on the Simon & Schuster website) learned how to be concise
>from writing short stories, the medium, even in this day of
>the novel, is still incredibly important. Without magazines
> such as Weird Tales, Absolute Magnitude, and F&SF, it is
>quite possible that the SF short story will die.
<snip>
Taking this off at a tangent, if you don't mind:
That's fascinating. You're the first person I've heard say
recently (come to think of it: for a _long_ time) that
writing short stories fed into how they wrote novels. Maybe
we're in need of having that conversation here?
I'm more used to coming across people like me -- long
structured narratives are natural to me. Trying short
stories to learn how to write a novel was about as much help
as being poked in the eye with a stuffed ferret. It's only
over the last few years that I've learned anything about
writing short stories (as opposed to shaved-down novels), and
I still can't adequately verbalise how they differ from
novels when it comes to the process of writing.
When I say 'natural', I mean that I used to enjoy reading
short stories a lot, but that wore off a while back; and even
if I'd never read one in my life, that wouldn't have stopped
me trying my hand at novels...
I wonder if you could say a bit about how you feel the flow
between short stories and novels has worked for you? (Not
that I'm not interested in the "ads on Usenet" debate, but we
did have a previous one not so long ago.) If I were asked to
define the differences between short and long structured
narratives, 'concision' wouldn't necessarily be on the list.
For me, every word in a novel is necessary, every word in a
short story is necessary; there are a lot more in the former
than the latter, but --- concise? Short novels can be
concise. Long novels can be concise, when you know (by
reading) that the _story_ itself was longer, and this is a
short telling of it.
Pardon me burbling, I'm just thinking out loud...
I would guess you're right and it is the 'day of the novel'
in many ways. Probably we're past the historical period
where SF short stories brought about the prevalence of SF
novels. Maybe. That doesn't mean I want short stories to
vanish. (Any more than I want sonnets, or essays, or
portrait photography to vanish, come to that.)
So... novels and short stories: different beasts. There
evidently _is_ an overlap, for some, because you've found it
helpful. Can you say why?
I ask partly because I'm moving in the other direction, and
it seriously irritates me to be doing something for which I
don't have an appropriate technical vocabulary... but also
because I'm interested in your take on short stories per se.
And I'd rather talk about that than ads on Usenet. Mixed
motives, as all (most? many? some?) writers have? <g>
Oh, and a subpoint, from your paragraph -- isn't anybody who
writes anything 'an author'? Whether we get it into print or
not? I think you meant to specify 'published author'.
Mary
--
_ASH: A SECRET HISTORY_ : shortlisted for the Arthur C Clarke
Award; shortlisted for the British Science Fiction
Association Award; Locus Recommended Fantasy Novel.
mary_...@cix.compulink.co.uk
[...]
> However, to be honest, I think that writer's workshops such
>as Clarion, writer's circles, and mentoring serve a stronger
>instructional purpose than rec.arts.sf.composition. I
>learned more at the hands of Julie Czerneda, John Vornholt,
>and Dennis McKiernan than I ever learned while I was a
> regular here.
[...]
And I said I didn't want to get involved... yes, of course I
have a deadline currently breathing down my neck: why do you
ask? <g>
It's _all_ useful.
Or maybe I should say, it's all 'useful'.
Clarion, Milford, writers' circles, Usenet, the girl next
door, reading your story aloud to your partner, swapping
manuscripts with other writers, online crit groups, reading
published SF/F in magazines, and novels --- it's *all*
*useful.* Instructional, even.
I don't think any one bit of it is disposable, less useful
than the rest. I think we could do with more. Everything
that lets writers learn, lets them communicate with other
writers, is extremely valuable.
And on the other hand, none of it's necessary.
If r.a.sf.c. went belly-up, and the short story market rolled
over and died, people would still write good SF and fantasy.
When I wrote my first book, I hardly knew anyone else who
*read,* never mind wrote, and I doubt I exchanged a word with
anybody about it before I talked to an editor. (Who told me
where it needed fixing... :-) That's right up the other end
of the spectrum, but trust me: out there in some town where
they don't sell SF magazines, and Usenet isn't available,
*someone* is writing. Expect their book/short
story/screenplay along any time now...
Some writers _thrive_ on isolation and lack of comment: an
outside view destroys what they do before it's done. Fair
enough.
And on the other hand (how many hands am I up to? Oh. Never
mind!), why do things the hard way, if that _is_ the hard
way? Some of us can do isolation, but get far more from
Usenet and workshops and personal interaction. So the more
the merrier, so it's available for those who find it makes
writing infinitely easier to have it there.
But I think you're on a hiding to nowhere if you start trying
to rank those things in some kind of table of preference.
It's bound to be personal to you, as my list (if I made one)
would be personal to me. And mine would probably have
changed by this time next week.
Robert B. Marks
news:1ep9abo.gkkjl6xgdrr4N%dark...@mindspring.com...
> Robert B. Marks <Del...@iStar.SPAMBLOCKER.HERE.ca> wrote:
> > I was talking to Graydon about the fact that he stated that if he had to
> > choose between usenet being filled with spam and having the SF short
story
> > market crash and burn, he would have the SF short story market crash and
> > burn.
> >
> > Loyalty to a newsgroup is admirable, but if one wishes to be a
professional
> > writer, one must also have respect for his/her genre. Without that
respect,
> > one is destined to failure.
>
> I commend to you Russ Allbery's Rant.
> http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/writing/rant.html
Thanks for referring me to that; it was enlightening and very interesting.
> The functionality of usenet has not only brought me into the SF
> community, helped me fix an infodump, introduced me to an editor who
> doesn't frighten me, and given me the courage to actually send my work
> out into the world -- it has directly and causally led to me getting
> published for the first time (and I have my comp copies now!), and has
> directly and causally led to a number of valuable friendships and one
> intended life-partnership. /To me/, this is worth far more than the
> short story market, _and I write short stories_.
I agree that Usenet is important. I refined my own writing through an
amateur writing newsgroup, and I value the newsgroups a great deal.
However, it seems to me that when having the choice between seeing a public
forum fail and seeing a large part of your genre fail, there is something
inherently wrong in wishing for the genre to fail.
(I just want to be clear that I am referring to Graydon's post with that
last sentence, not yours. You said that you value usenet more than the
short story markets, but you have not wished either of them to failure, nor
could I ever see you doing so.)
BTW, congrats on the publication. May it be a runaway success (it feels
great, doesn't it?).
> (I do want to add that, although I snipped the resume-measuring contest
> and judiciously removed my response to same as overly catty, I must
> point out that "Mine is bigger than his!" isn't a line that works so
> well.)
I'm sorry about that aspect of my post if it offended; I felt that a pissing
contest was preferable to an all-out flame, and I did not wish to meet open
hostility with open hostility.
Robert B. Marks
news:975prc$62f$1...@plutonium.compulink.co.uk...
> In article <1Wel6.210944$Y.85...@news.total.net>,
> Del...@iStar.SPAMBLOCKER.HERE.ca (Robert B. Marks) wrote:
>
> <snip>
> > Considering that authors like myself (and yes, I am now an
> >author; my first book came out in October, and can be found
> >on the Simon & Schuster website) learned how to be concise
> >from writing short stories, the medium, even in this day of
> >the novel, is still incredibly important. Without magazines
> > such as Weird Tales, Absolute Magnitude, and F&SF, it is
> >quite possible that the SF short story will die.
> <snip>
>
> Taking this off at a tangent, if you don't mind:
>
> That's fascinating. You're the first person I've heard say
> recently (come to think of it: for a _long_ time) that
> writing short stories fed into how they wrote novels. Maybe
> we're in need of having that conversation here?
In more ways than one, actually...
You see, I was poking around a Diablo web page back in August when I
discovered an announcement that Blizzard and Pocket Books had signed an
agreement to do several books based in their game worlds. I am the sort
that prefers to play by his own rules, and as a result there are extremely
few licensed worlds that I would actually be willing to write in, but Diablo
was one of them.
So, I tracked down the editor at Pocket who was handling this (via a phone
call to Blizzard and some very polite words), a wonderful fellow named
Marco, and told him that while I was so far unpublished, I had written two
novels already, and was wondering if I might be able to put together a
proposal for a Diablo book.
Marco was VERY impressed by my persistence (even a bit surprised at the fact
that I had managed to track him down), and told me that while all of the
print books were assigned, if I sent him some of my short fiction he'd
certainly consider me for some future work. So, I sent him a couple of
short stories.
Two days later, I got a call from him saying that Blizzard had decided to do
a series of e-books, that both he and Blizzard were both very impressed with
the short stories I had sent him, and would I like the contract, with a
publication date in October? After falling out of my chair in shock, I
vigorously agreed, and Demonsbane was underway.
Demonsbane may not be long (as an e-book, it would be considered a novella
in print), but with the Demonsbane contract I was able to become a client
with the Donald Maass Literary Agency, and now my agent is working on
selling one of my books, a 100,000 word one.
No problem...I do it all the time.
You are right; long novels can be concise. However, in many cases, they are
not. For example, I recently read J.V. Jones' "A Cavern of Black Ice,"
which I think is around 250,000 words, and it is book one in a trilogy.
After finishing this volume, I suddenly realized that I had covered the same
amount of material in around 25,000 words in my current WIP (titled "War of
Succession"; I'm holding off on it for now while I wait for my agent to get
back to me regarding the finished one, Magus Draconum...she has some
editorial comments for me). I found Jones had put in several unnecessary
scenes that did not advance the world, characters, or plot in any way,
almost as though she was trying to stretch out a single novel idea into a
trilogy.
Now, with a short story, you have to be brief, and you have to be concise.
Tackling a good story in between 2,000 and 4,000 words is not easy, and you
quickly discover just how much of your work can be excised from the draft
without anybody noticing. Character development has to be faster than a
bullet train, description has to be quick and efficient, and the plot has to
go VERY smoothly or else the entire story falls flat.
In my own experience, I find that when one turns back to a novel after
writing some short stories, one finds one's self able to cover a greater
amount of territory in a shorter number of words than before. I guess a
good example could be:
(Note: these examples are rather hard to write for me, as I am used to being
very concise in my own fiction)
Pre-short story: "David ran down the hill, his legs pumping, adreneline
rushing. His mind filled with the infinite possibilities that could await,
all truly horrifying. He could see a strange form at the bottom of the
rise, but whether or not it was his sister he could not tell.
"'Please may it not be her,' he prayed under his ragged breath, every
step bringing him closer to terrifying revelation. He knew there was
something wrong, just knew it, but even now he couldn't put his finger on
what it might be.
"Reaching the bottom of the hill, he came to a stop, heart beating
wildly. The truth stared at him, glared through him, but all he could do
was stand still, paralyzed with fear."
Post-short story: "David ran down the hill, legs pumping, adreneline
rushing. His mind filled with the infinite possibilities that could await,
all truly horrifying. Praying for his sister's safety with every breath, he
saw a strange form at the base of the rise, something unearthly waiting for
him. Finally, he reached the bottom, and his eyes widened in terror."
These both cover the same amount of territory (David running down the hill
and finding that his something horrible has happened to his sister), but the
first one, while still very concise, is a LOT longer than the second one.
No doubt both would do well in a novel-length story, but I'm pretty sure the
latter one is better overall.
> I would guess you're right and it is the 'day of the novel'
> in many ways. Probably we're past the historical period
> where SF short stories brought about the prevalence of SF
> novels. Maybe. That doesn't mean I want short stories to
> vanish. (Any more than I want sonnets, or essays, or
> portrait photography to vanish, come to that.)
What bothers me is that "the day of the novel" might be giving way to "the
day of the trilogy." As I said in an earlier post, I can no longer count
the number of times that I have wanted to throw my hands up and scream in a
bookstore because I couldn't find a good fantasy novel that didn't either
lead into a trilogy, or be somewhere at the end of one.
> So... novels and short stories: different beasts. There
> evidently _is_ an overlap, for some, because you've found it
> helpful. Can you say why?
>
> I ask partly because I'm moving in the other direction, and
> it seriously irritates me to be doing something for which I
> don't have an appropriate technical vocabulary... but also
> because I'm interested in your take on short stories per se.
> And I'd rather talk about that than ads on Usenet. Mixed
> motives, as all (most? many? some?) writers have? <g>
>
> Oh, and a subpoint, from your paragraph -- isn't anybody who
> writes anything 'an author'? Whether we get it into print or
> not? I think you meant to specify 'published author'.
The definition that I use is that once somebody has had a work of fiction
published at a professional rate, they become an "author." I got this
particular definition from Julie Czerneda during a writer's workshop. Now,
that definition may be wrong, but it does make a fair bit of sense to me
(and it keeps the word "author" actually meaning something, rather than
being a throwaway term for anybody who can put more than 80,000 words
together regardless of quality).
Doug Wickstrom
<Dxdl6.40691$LB6.1...@news2.atl>
"Michael Adams" <art...@bellsouth.net> excited the ether to
say:
>An ad. That doesn't appear to be crossposted.
It wasn't. It was multi-posted, which is very much worse.
--
Doug Wickstrom
"Anyone who has never made a mistake has never tried anything new."
--Albert Einstein
Doug Wickstrom
<1Wel6.210944$Y.85...@news.total.net>
"Robert B. Marks" <Del...@iStar.SPAMBLOCKER.HERE.ca> excited the
ether to say:
>Graydon, I think you have some serious thinking to do. And, if you happen
>to be at Ad Astra this weekend, do me a favour: avoid my Saturday reading
>and my Sunday signing...I really don't think I want you near me at this
>convention after your comments here.
This is probably not the best way to win friends and influence
people.
Rachael Lininger
Graydon Saunders <gra...@dsl.ca> wrote:
>On Thu, 22 Feb 2001 21:40:53 -0600,
>Richard Horton <rrho...@prodigy.net> scripsit:
>>I love short fiction, mind you -- and I don't by any means want Warren
>>to fail, and I think it's appalling to jump from quite properly
>>admonishing Warren for improperly posting an ad here -- we don't want
>>ads, and anyone who posts them anywhere but in a .sig must be
>>admonished posthaste -- to wishing for him to go out of business.
>
>high enough to keep insincere people -- whom I do not believe Warren
>to be numbered among -- from doing it anyway.
Sounds more like mortal sin.
Just "an apology" doesn't correct posting an ad. I think that a sincere
apology, with a promise not to do it again, and following through on that
promise, should. Because if an honest apology can't correct it,
there's nothing to keep people from continuing to do it anyway.
Rachae
--
Rachael Lininger | "I've never thought ignorance
rac...@dd-b.net | should preclude a good argument." --Audley
Randy Money
> >The point is that the publications are sometimes quite swamped; the writers
> >are out there, and lots of short stories are being written.
>
> Well, no. What you've demonstrated is that there are people _trying
> unsuccessfully_ to write short stories.
I suspect there's a wide range of lousiness there, though. Not
everything in the slush pile is complete garbage, a fair percentage may
just be not-good-enough. If the work I've seen on a couple of crit.
lists I am or have been on is any indication, there is work that is
terrible -- from poorly conceived and executed scenes to rotten grammar
and syntax -- and work that may be mostly well-written sentence by
sentence, even well thought-out in story logic and characterization, but
cannot overcome an ancient, creaky plot or some other deficient element.
Which is just to say there are fiction writers trying to write and sell
short stories who haven't quite reached professional level. They may
reach that level eventually, or not, but surely won't without outlets
for their work. Unless they become novelists.
> I wish I could remember the source of this anecdote, but I don't, so
> I'll just leave it anonymous:
>
> A new editor started on his job at the bottom rung, reading slush, and
> was appalled. After about a week on the job, a friend came to visit
> the office and looked around at the stacks and stacks of manila
> envelopes. He picked a few up and said wonderingly, "Just think,
> there's a story in each of these!"
>
> The editor replied, "God, I _wish_ there were!"
>
> Most slush is not stories. It is, in my daughter's usage, storylike
> objects.
>
> >(The estimate I use for the rejection rate of short stories is around 99%,
> >just from sheer competition.)
>
> Most of it is from sheer lousiness.
>
> At any rate, the demand among writers for short story _markets_ is
> huge. The demand among _readers_ for short fiction is quite small
> these days, and fed largely by theme anthologies.
Now that's seriously depressing. Unless the theme coincides with
something a writer already has written or is a theme the writer is
strongly attracted to, theme anthologies seem like a great incentive for
hack work. (Add obvious disclaimers about themes so broad as to impose
almost no limitation.)
Randy Money
(okay; if that last crack deserves bashing, give me what i deserve)
Heather Anne Nicoll
> Heather Anne Nicoll <dark...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
> news:1ep9abo.gkkjl6xgdrr4N%dark...@mindspring.com...
> > I commend to you Russ Allbery's Rant.
> > http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/writing/rant.html
>
> Thanks for referring me to that; it was enlightening and very interesting.
'At's Russ for you.
> > The functionality of usenet has not only brought me into the SF
> > community, helped me fix an infodump, introduced me to an editor who
> > doesn't frighten me, and given me the courage to actually send my work
> > out into the world -- it has directly and causally led to me getting
> > published for the first time (and I have my comp copies now!), and has
> > directly and causally led to a number of valuable friendships and one
> > intended life-partnership. /To me/, this is worth far more than the
> > short story market, _and I write short stories_.
>
> I agree that Usenet is important. I refined my own writing through an
> amateur writing newsgroup, and I value the newsgroups a great deal.
> However, it seems to me that when having the choice between seeing a public
> forum fail and seeing a large part of your genre fail, there is something
> inherently wrong in wishing for the genre to fail.
Only if you consider support for the genre to be innately more important
than the sorts of things in the Rant, I'd say. The value of usenet is
not purely its value as a forum.
> (I just want to be clear that I am referring to Graydon's post with that
> last sentence, not yours. You said that you value usenet more than the
> short story markets, but you have not wished either of them to failure, nor
> could I ever see you doing so.)
I tend to try not to ill-wish things. It makes me a significantly less
pleasant human being to be.
> BTW, congrats on the publication. May it be a runaway success (it feels
> great, doesn't it?).
I've written five percent of a published book! (It's a compilation
project; someone on another newsgroup recruited all the regulars who
could spell and we put the thing together over about eight months.
alt.sports.baseball.bos-redsox, the sports newsgroup where spelling and
grammar count.)
I expect it to do fairly well. I think one of the major chains just
doubled their pre-order, a further promising sign; I seem to remember
the publisher mentioning something of the sort to me when I picked up my
comp copies. (It formally comes out 1 March.) 'Tis a very spiffy book,
and I need to bring it to my game tonight to wave at friends.
Robert B. Marks
news:l11d9to7irq6s6b0g...@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 22 Feb 2001 15:46:23 -0500, in message
> <1Wel6.210944$Y.85...@news.total.net>
> "Robert B. Marks" <Del...@iStar.SPAMBLOCKER.HERE.ca> excited the
> ether to say:
>
> >Graydon, I think you have some serious thinking to do. And, if you
happen
> >to be at Ad Astra this weekend, do me a favour: avoid my Saturday reading
> >and my Sunday signing...I really don't think I want you near me at this
> >convention after your comments here.
>
> This is probably not the best way to win friends and influence
> people.
There are two things you don't know about this situation:
1. Graydon and I do have a history, and we have met in person. In many
ways, this exchange regarding Absolute Magnitude represents the first civil
words we have spoken (or written) to one another in over three years.
2. I am not trying to win friends and influence people.
I have to be honest, though, I am impressed with the way Graydon has reacted
to my comments. He remained civil throughout, and replied to logic with
logic, even though his point of view differed from mine. It did not
degenerate into a flame war, which I had half expected it to do (and wanted
dearly to avoid).
I guess Graydon's presence near me at Ad Astra would not quite as
objectionable as I had first thought.
jhetley
> On Thu, 22 Feb 2001 14:12:56 -0500, in message
> <Dxdl6.40691$LB6.1...@news2.atl>
> "Michael Adams" <art...@bellsouth.net> excited the ether to
> say:
>
> >An ad. That doesn't appear to be crossposted.
>
> It wasn't. It was multi-posted, which is very much worse.
>
It's funny. There was one ad, for a product that is probably of
professional interest to readers of this newsgroup. There have been scores
of posts attacking that ad, with no relevance to the craft or business of
writing. I have difficulty deciding which group constitutes the graver
threat to public decency.
--
Jim Hetley
"The one thing you can't trade for your heart's desire is your heart"
Lois McMaster Bujold
Michael Adams
news:1epa2eq.1vedkalv4m8g0N%ada...@attentiontin.it...
>
> Micheal, for the sake of me I can't see what this has to do with my
> post. Was it just that you wanted to contributed and randomly chose to
> attach your comment at this point in the thread, or is it something I
> said? I'm perpelexed.
>
It doesn't have anything specifically to do with your post. I was simply
feeling a bit frustrated with all the personal attacks being made in this
thread against someone clearly legitimate who had something that was and
could have been of actual interest to people.
--
Michael Adams, Editor, The SF Commentary Site--
http://www.mindspring.com/~sfcommentator/index.html
Email: art...@bellsouth.net
Michael Adams
tone--"I think you may wish to reconsider" was not used. And while I can't
defend responding in kind, it does seem that the "pot is calling the kettle
black"...
I'll leave it at that, as I'm absolutely positive that you know what I'm
talking about.
Karen Lofstrom
: And I really hate to see him get all this negativity back. These are
: hard times, and there are some New Rules brewing in the wonderful
: world of publishing. To survive, it is sometimes necessary to break
: the Old Rules, if the end result justifies it.
Vera, this is really not helping. It's clear that you're not a Usenet
person. Bouncing in here, not knowing the rules, traditions, history, and
telling us that we should be willing to sacrifice Usenet (about which many
of us care deeply) for the good of the publishing industry ... ack.
It doesn not help Warren, who has already apologized graciously, and whom
I hope will continue posting here as our friend.
--
Karen Lofstrom lofs...@lava.net
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't see, Mr Speaker, why we should put ourselves out of the way to
serve posterity. What has posterity ever done for us?" -- Roche Boyle
Callison
>
> At any rate, the demand among writers for short story _markets_ is
> huge. The demand among _readers_ for short fiction is quite small
> these days, and fed largely by theme anthologies.
Well, I may be a member of only a very small minority, then, but I have
always loved short fiction, have always sought out short fiction, will
read a collection of short stories before a new novel (or Huge Fantasy
Series) every time and actively seek out and collect short fiction. I
subscribe to magazines (although perhaps not Warren's - I don't know his
entire roster) that feature short sf/f fiction and would be devastated to
see their demise. Whether or not their editors/owners/whatever
are capable of understanding or respecting usenet culture.
Many people who IRL I would not have wanted to know or associate with have
produced works of lasting value and artistic merit, so there are very few
instances in which I will transfer what I know of the creator to the
creation and find it tainted thus.
This does not mean that I appreciate Warren's original post - I too
thought it rather in poor taste, especially since he *has* been posting
for some time in these groups and should have known better. However, one
imagines he now has learned, and I don't really feel it necessary to draw
and quarter, behead and bury someone for a social gaffe.
(I do not, after all, tar and feather Jehovah's Witnesses, even though
they interrupt my free time and invade my space, both of which are
extremely valuable to me. A polite "no thanks, not interested" seems to
suffice. Same for telemarketers, although I've gone to the local
equivalent of a killfile with the answering machine screening calls.
Would it feel better to hunt them down and burn them alive within their
little cubicles? Of course it would, but that would take even more time
out of my life, which rather defeats the point. Much as having fifty
posts debating the server-sucking nature of advertising does in this
instance.)
In any case, my two cents, take it or leave it. Just wanted to put in a
word for those of us who actually love reading short fiction and for whom
a well-crafted short tale is worth ten of a certain fantasy writer's
massively bloated endless series creations. (cheaper, too)
And isn't there room for both?
Tracey
A Reader, not a Writer.
Jo Walton
gra...@dsl.ca "Graydon Saunders" writes:
> On Thu, 22 Feb 2001 21:40:53 -0600,
> Richard Horton <rrho...@prodigy.net> scripsit:
> >I love short fiction, mind you -- and I don't by any means want Warren
> >to fail, and I think it's appalling to jump from quite properly
> >admonishing Warren for improperly posting an ad here -- we don't want
> >ads, and anyone who posts them anywhere but in a .sig must be
> >admonished posthaste -- to wishing for him to go out of business.
>
> If posting an ad is something which apology corrects, the cost is not
> high enough to keep insincere people -- whom I do not believe Warren
> to be numbered among -- from doing it anyway.
OTOH, if there's no apology and no redress possible for doing something
wrong entirely accidentally, in a social setting, then that is also a
problem. And that doesn't prevent anyone insincere, or merely irritated,
from doing it again either -- if someone is already a pariah after a
genuine error, they can't sink any lower and they may as well continue
to post ads. (After all, the reason we want them to stop isn't that it
doesn't work.)
Warren is a real person. He's here, he's posting, he's participating.
He made a mistake, he apologised, he's _still here_ and he's by all the
gods _embarrassed_ about it. He isn't trying to defend his mistake, he
isn't blustering, he's very unlikely to do it again and he hasn't gone
away. I think that he deserves some slack for that, and some distinction
to be made between what he did and, say, Woodside, may their increase be
taken by the caterpillar.
Otherwise we're in the position of the Chinese general who's going to
be killed for being late so he may as well rebel.
--
Jo J...@bluejo.demon.co.uk
I kissed a kif at Kefk
Locus Recommended First Novel: *THE KING'S PEACE* out now from Tor.
Sample Chapters, Map, Poems, & stuff at http://www.bluejo.demon.co.uk
Ed
> professional interest to readers of this newsgroup. There have been scores
> of posts attacking that ad, with no relevance to the craft or business of
> writing. I have difficulty deciding which group constitutes the graver
Yup. A moth fluttered through the yard, and all those of the pack who
are predisposed toward barking about such an outrageous invasion of
their territory... barked.
Because some barked, others felt the urge, too.
My neighbor's yard is like that... He has a half dozen or so Cocker
Spaniels, and if they keep going off at every little thing, the local
Animal Control people may soon have a half dozen Spaniels.
If they were a little smaller, maybe Florida's turkey buzzards would
swoop down and... well, you know. :)
Ed & ABINTRA PRESS! http://abintra.virtualave.net/
SF Titles: "3rd World Products, Inc.- Books I&II"
(Caution: some tasteful erotica, titles are marked)
Ilmari Karonen
>In article <slrn99bsqm....@localhost.localdomain>,
>Graydon Saunders <gra...@dsl.ca> wrote:
>>
>>If posting an ad is something which apology corrects, the cost is not
>>high enough to keep insincere people -- whom I do not believe Warren
>>to be numbered among -- from doing it anyway.
>
>Sounds more like mortal sin.
>
>Just "an apology" doesn't correct posting an ad. I think that a sincere
>apology, with a promise not to do it again, and following through on that
>promise, should. Because if an honest apology can't correct it,
>there's nothing to keep people from continuing to do it anyway.
I think I must agree with both of you here; I must agree with Graydon
that multiposting ads on Usenet is a form of net-abuse for which a
personal boycott on the business being advertised is a perfectly
justified minimal response, and that just an apology, without further
evidence of its sincerity, is not enough.
I must also agree with Rachael, however, that it should not be an
unforgivable offense. There is no contradiction here. Constructive
participation in a newsgroup I read is essentially a a favor done to
me along with all the other readers. I tend to consider it reasonable
to repay that favor, should the possibility arise, perhaps financially
by choosing to buy things that would benefit the participants.
So, if Warren's apology is sincere, and backed by actual contribution
to the newsgroup, then he has done me both a favor and a disfavor. It
depends on the extent of his contribution whether I consider the sum
to be positive or negative, and others will make up their own minds.
Just an apology, however, is not and cannot be enough for forgiveness,
particularly in a medium where insincere apologies are as easy to make
as on Usenet. At best it can serve as a sign of intent to make up for
the offense, at worst it is worth no more than the bytes it is written
with (which have essentially negative worth, like garbage).
On Usenet, "not doing it again" is not enough. If the Usenet, as a
whole, is to survive, we must make sure that potential abusers will
not commit net-abuse even once. If everyone who could and wanted to
posted just one ad in each newsgroup, the noise would drown out all
discussion. That is why there must be some form of deterrent.
Even for those with no malicious intent, like Warren, it's all too
easy to wander into an unfamiliar newsgroup, post one ad, get flamed,
see the error, post an apology and wander off leaving no contribution
to the group but the ad and the apology. That is why, even is these
cases, there must be some compensation, so that either the group will
ultimately benefit, or the ad poster will not. Preferably that should
be an exclusive or, but reality is not always that fair.
For those who _do_ post ads with malicious intent, the proper response
involves reporting the Acceptable Usage Policy violation to their ISP,
refusing to have any dealings with that business, and reporting their
activities to the local law enforcement authorities after finding out
which laws their actions violate in the relevant jurisdiction.
Nothing less will keep them from doing it anyway.
--
Ilmari Karonen - http://www.sci.fi/~iltzu/
"Everything sucks, except those things you want to."
-- The Flying Hamster in the monastery
Dan Goodman
<dnapubl...@iname.com> wrote:
>I like the name of this thread a lot better than the previouse name.
>Okay, the opinion I am about to share is most definitely biased, as I own
>about half of the short markets out there, but here goes. Short fiction
>has always been the lifeblood of SF. That has not changed,
Not quite correct. Quite simply -- sf used to be a _magazine_ market,
with a comparatively few books being published. And an sf novel in
book form was likely to be either related short fiction pieces
stitched together (the Foundation trilogy, for example) or a butchered
version of a magazine serial.
> though, I do
>see how those who aren't paying close attention could managed to miss
>that. Yes, many of the short fiction markets have been shrinking, but so
>have the sales of paperback novels. In both cases, this has more to do
>with the change in distribution channels than in the literary merit of
>the forms. One argument I've heard used to denigrate the short form has
>been this, "If the short form is so good, then why has Analog and
>Asimov's been sold so many times." Whenever I hear that I just shake my
>head. The reality is that on more than one occasion these magazines were
>sold because their parent companies got into financial trouble and those
>two magazine were the only magazines that they had that were worth
>anything, so they sold them to get the money to bail the company out.
>
>Now here's why the short form is vitally important to the field. It has
>always been in the short form that the majority of innovations have come.
>Why is that? Simple: the risk factors. Each book must stand on it's own
>sales. If a book editor take a lot of risks with novels that are strange
>and innovative but ultimately don't sell, they won't be employed all that
>long. So book publishing is necessarily more conservative. At a
>magazine, if something comes in that is wild and different the editor
>doesn't have as much at stake. Fist off, the readership is already
>signed up for the next year, and secondly it's only one story. So even
>if the bulk of the readership ultimately hates that story, if they are
>happy with the rest of the issue, no real harm has been done to the
>magazine. Now when an innovative story hits, it has the potential of
>changing the field. If the short markets disappear, SF will become an
>even more conservative field. My fear is that it would stagnate into
>something that would eventually become unreadable.
>
>Warren
>
>
>--
>DNA Publications, Inc. - Publishers of Genre Magazines
>SF Chronicle * Absolute Magnitude * Weird Tales * Dreams of Decadence *
>Aboriginal * Fantastic Stories * Mythic Delirium
>Visit our website: http://www.dnapublications.com/
>Subscribe to our FREE e-mail newsletter:
>http://www.egroups.com/subscribe/dnapublications
Dan Goodman
dsg...@visi.com
Whatever you wish for me, may you have twice as much.
http://www.visi.com/~dsgood/index.html
Whatever you wish for me, may you have twice as much.
Dan Goodman
<rrho...@prodigy.net> wrote:
>On Fri, 23 Feb 2001 06:54:50 GMT, Marc Brutschy
><brut...@home.com.nospam> wrote:
>
>>"Robert B. Marks" <Del...@iStar.SPAMBLOCKER.HERE.ca> wrote:
>>
>>>Still, in the modern day and age, being a professional short story author is
>>>VERY difficult. That does not make it impossible, though...
>>
>>I heard someone say once that Howard Waldrop was making a living
>>selling short fiction. I can't remember how long ago I heard this, but
>>I was wondering... has anyone else heard that?
>
>I am given to understand that Waldrop makes a very marginal living, by
>most of our standards.
>
>I think it may be true that the bulk of Harlan Ellison's (probably
>quite comfortable) income derives from his short fiction. But he's an
>exception.
>
>What really interests me are some of the older writers who wrote
>almost exclusively short fiction, and who did not have "day jobs", and
>who didn't really write that much or achieve that much popularity.
>James Schmitz is one example. H. B. Fyfe is an even more obscure
>example. How did they survive? (Their wives may have worked, is one
>possibility.)
Did they write only in one genre?
Lori Selke
Graydon Saunders <gra...@dsl.ca> wrote:
>>It's true, but not many people would be willing to live on what
>>Waldrop lives on. He cannot afford a phone, and I think a significant
>>part of his diet comes from fish that he catches himself.
>
>Which is unquestionably well below the poverty line, so I think the
>'making a living' part is dubious.
He's alive, isn't he? Content within his means? What other definition
would you choose to use?
Lori
--
se...@io.com, se...@sirius.com, http://www.io.com/~selk
"But this isn't a dance! It's upright delirium!" -- The Desert Peach
Mary K. Kuhner
Robert B. Marks <Del...@iStar.SPAMBLOCKER.HERE.ca> wrote:
>What bothers me is that "the day of the novel" might be giving way to "the
>day of the trilogy." As I said in an earlier post, I can no longer count
>the number of times that I have wanted to throw my hands up and scream in a
>bookstore because I couldn't find a good fantasy novel that didn't either
>lead into a trilogy, or be somewhere at the end of one.
It may be worth considering that some of the drive to series
comes neither from readers nor from writers, but from
distributors. The easiest book to pitch to a distributor may
be book N in a series, where book N-1 did decently.
E-publishing and other non-traditional publishing forms are my
personal hope for getting rid of the middleman. I like having
editors to pick out good books, but having another selection
step in the middle, run by people who don't *read* the books
at all, doesn't serve us well.
In the meantime, you could read Sean Stewart, who writes gorgeous
stand-alone fantasies. (Some are thematically linked and/or
in the same setting, but they are whole stories, not parts of
stories.) Or Patricia McKillip, who aside from one trilogy mainly
writes stand-alones (and, lately, very short ones).
For myself, I think stories have natural lengths that vary
enormously--_Song for the Basilisk_ and the _Secret Country_
trilogy are both exactly the length they need to be, even
though one is four times the other--but I do agree that it's
frustrating when market pressures make a work longer or shorter
than its ideal length.
That said, I'm another of those people like Pamela for whom
trying to write short stories is not a way to improve my
novel-writing. I still hope to write a short story someday
that works, but I'm not holding my breath.
Mary Kuhner mkku...@eskimo.com
John F. Eldredge
Hash: SHA1
On Tue, 20 Feb 2001 01:07:26 -0500, Warren Lapine & Angela Kessler
<dnapubl...@iname.com> wrote:
>In article <slrn9927jj....@localhost.localdomain>,
>gra...@dsl.ca says...
>> On Mon, 19 Feb 2001 02:26:37 -0500,
>> Warren Lapine & Angela Kessler <dnapubl...@iname.com>
>> scripsit:
>> >Considering that we don't agree on much of anything, I doubt
>> >you'd hate to think that. But I've been posting in these news
>> >groups on and off for years.
>>
>> Which means you have absolutely no excuse for posting that ad.
>>
>> You've just permanently lost at least one potential customer, and
>> converted them into someone with a strong preference for seeing
>> your publications fail.
>>
>>
>Graydon,
>
>I'm Sorry, I didn't mean to offend anyone. I've been away from
>these news groups since May of 2000. Back then I made similar
>posts without getting this kind of response. Since people are
>obviously much more adverse to this now than they were even nine
>months ago, I won't do it again. If my publications fail, more
>than half of the short fiction magazines of any size would be gone
>and considering the state of short fiction I'm not sure the
>magazine field would recover.
I have been on USENET since 1992. Even nine years ago, posting a
commercial advertisement in a newsgroup not specifically set up for
commercial announcements (such as the biz* hierarchy) was considered
bad form. It isn't just a new phenomenon. If you have indeed read
newsgroups in the past, then you should be aware of that point of
etiquette.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPfreeware 6.5.1 Int. for non-commercial use
<http://www.pgpinternational.com>
iQA/AwUBOpcpCjMYPge5L34aEQLbwACgrTtfzecuN/mcCPTL1cOdXdlr5d0AnjSU
TnNABa5BhcOsLp3a4uCgHVeK
=0Up+
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
John F. Eldredge -- eldr...@earthlink.net, eldr...@poboxes.com
PGP key available from:
http://home.earthlink.net/~eldredge/
"There must be, not a balance of power, but a community of power;
not organized rivalries, but an organized common peace." - Woodrow Wilson
Richard Horton
>Did they write only in one genre?
Schmitz published (very occasionally) short mysteries. Early in his
career he was a journalist, but as far as I know he was not a
journalist after he began selling SF regularly.
Fyfe did not seem to publish in other genre, which doesn't preclude a
pseudonym, or me simply missing his other work. He may also have done
nonfiction -- I don't know of any, but it would be easy to miss that.
Vera Nazarian
<vlatko.ju...@zg.hinet.hr> wrote:
>On Fri, 23 Feb 2001 04:48:00 GMT, vera.naza...@sff.net (Vera
>Nazarian) wrote:
>
>>That is, while "My new book is on the
>>shelves! Anyone seen it?" or "I've a program I think might
>>be useful to writers: blah blah blah for more information,
>>see the following URL:" is generally tolerable, long ads or
>>extremely non-relevant posts or posts filled with hyperbole
>>will likely get flamed.
>>
>>The charter deliberately leaves the matter vague--it is up
>>to the group participants to determine what level of advertising
>>is acceptable. While one can probably expect the posters (by
>>and large, at least) to be reasonable, tread the line
>>carefully. There -is- such a thing as bad publicity.
>>
>>As you can see, the FAQX makes it into a hazy area, and gives all of
>>us here leeway to "forgive" certain kinds of very light very
>>small-scale advertising.
>
>If I may point out, 'small-scale advertising' doesn't exactly mean
>what was said in the first paragraph.
Well, the whole thing appears to be left very much up to
interpretation, at least to me.
>Sometimes even one-line ads* are going to get flamed and get annoyed
>reactions. That's why it was said that the charter leaves the matter
>vague.
Yup, apparently so.
--
~ Vera Imagine a world without color...
LORDS OF RAINBOW, an epic fantasy first novel.
DREAMS OF THE COMPASS ROSE, a "hybrid" short story collection,
Both coming soon from Wildside Press in 2001. (trade paperback & hardcover)
James Nicoll
Graydon Saunders <gra...@dsl.ca> wrote:
>On Thu, 22 Feb 2001 19:03:13 -0500, Robert B. Marks
><Del...@iStar.SPAMBLOCKER.HERE.ca> scripsit:
>>Graydon Saunders <gra...@dsl.ca> wrote in message
>>news:slrn99b3j0....@localhost.localdomain...
>>> >the importance of the SF short story market.
>>>
>>> Low and dropping, you mean?
>>
>>Considering how many of the best people in the field (Harlan Ellison,
>>Isaac Asimov, Ray Bradbury)
>
>60s, 40s, 40s, respectively; not even vaguely current market
>conditions.
>
>>started with short stories, and (those
>>who are still alive, at least) are continuing with these short
>>stories, I really think you should reconsider the nature of the SF
>>short story market. It is not as low as you might think.
>
>It's been steadily dying for a good thirty years now; there is no
>indication that it's not going to keep right on dying, because one can
>no longer make even the immitation of a living as a short story
>writer.
More like 40 years? Since the end of the 1950s boom in magazines
which was what, 1958 or so?.
I would be willing to make a case that the Great Age of
short SF was 1937-1980: JWC becomes ASF editor to the death of
Galaxy Magazine, which I think might have been to North American
short SF what the death of SPI was to wargaming. Dunno if it
a strong case or a good one but I think I could make it.
Why did short science fiction become unreadable [in the
mass] in recent decades?
James Nicoll
--
"Somehow I managed to get a job as an apprentice structural engineering
draughtsman, where I was supposed to design buildings which people would
sit in and the roof would not fall down and kill them. A big responsibility
for someone whose total education had come from PLANET STORIES." Bob Shaw
Hedgehog
> it appears that there are only about 30 or so regulars. Tell me, where are
> these "thousands of writers and aspiring writers"?
Listening?
--
All Ears Hedgehog
Text copyright by the author. Hyperlinks may *only* be added with permission.
Warren Lapine & Angela Kessler
>
> >It's been steadily dying for a good thirty years now; there is no
> >indication that it's not going to keep right on dying, because one can
> >no longer make even the immitation of a living as a short story
> >writer.
>
> More like 40 years? Since the end of the 1950s boom in magazines
> which was what, 1958 or so?.
>
> I would be willing to make a case that the Great Age of
> short SF was 1937-1980: JWC becomes ASF editor to the death of
> Galaxy Magazine, which I think might have been to North American
> short SF what the death of SPI was to wargaming. Dunno if it
> a strong case or a good one but I think I could make it.
>
> Why did short science fiction become unreadable [in the
> mass] in recent decades?
>
> James Nicoll
Golden Age magazines side by side with what's being written today, todays
stuff is, for the most part, far and away better. I also don't think
that the form is dying. Every single one of DNA Publication's magazine
has seen at least a ten percent growth each of the last five years. I
think the bigger magazines were and are, with exception of F&SF, owned by
people who don't understand the genre or the market place. I also think
the pay rate that short fiction writers get is a shame. It should have
gone up over the years, but didn't despite the magazines being able to
afford more. As I've gotten bigger I've been increasing pay rates, and I
will continue to do so. My hope is to one day have a big enough
circulation to be able to pay short fiction writers a decent livable
wage. I still believe that the readership is there, and I'm going to
work damned hard to prove it.
patricia bowne
>
>
> What really interests me are some of the older writers who wrote
> almost exclusively short fiction, and who did not have "day jobs", and
> who didn't really write that much or achieve that much popularity.
> James Schmitz is one example. H. B. Fyfe is an even more obscure
> example. How did they survive? (Their wives may have worked, is one
> possibility.)
>
Or they may have had investment income. Short story writing
wouldn't be the only career out there that one can only afford
to have if one doesn't financially need it.
Pat (who teaches at a small women's college)
Zeborah
should be morally outraged, insults, lectures, and arguments between
people whose beliefs don't actually differ *that* much>
Okay, I'm bored now. Can we talk about writing again?
Zeborah
--
Gravity is no joke.
http://www.crosswinds.net/~zeborahnz
Zeborah
> Now, with a short story, you have to be brief, and you have to be concise.
> Tackling a good story in between 2,000 and 4,000 words is not easy, and you
> quickly discover just how much of your work can be excised from the draft
> without anybody noticing. Character development has to be faster than a
> bullet train, description has to be quick and efficient, and the plot has to
> go VERY smoothly or else the entire story falls flat.
*My* short stories tend to be about a thousand words, and this has held
constant since the first half-way decent story I wrote at age ten-ish.
A thousand words seems to be approximately the limit for a whole story
written in a single sitting; anything longer than that will be take
multiple sittings, and rapidly lose momentum.
Actually, I think I'm getting a little longer. While poking around
today I found one of 1600 words that I wrote in one night; looking at it
now I think it could do with another few hundred words to expand in
places. The short I was working on at work for a couple of weeks wants
to be about 3000 words, if I could figure out what exactly happens in
the second scene. (Ooh. And I've got one that's 5K, if I can figure
out a decent end-scene for it.)
> What bothers me is that "the day of the novel" might be giving way to "the
> day of the trilogy." As I said in an earlier post, I can no longer count
> the number of times that I have wanted to throw my hands up and scream in
> a bookstore because I couldn't find a good fantasy novel that didn't
> either lead into a trilogy, or be somewhere at the end of one.
Just as long as it's a *good* trilogy. And all parts are readily
available, of course.
> The definition that I use is that once somebody has had a work of fiction
> published at a professional rate, they become an "author."
Hmm. I think my definition would be that a writer is someone who
writes; while an author is someone who writes as a job. Doesn't have to
be full-time, doesn't have to be successful, but my natural inclination
is that an author is aiming at some level of professionalism.
YMprobablyV.
Anne M. Marble
>
> I would be willing to make a case that the Great Age of
> short SF was 1937-1980: JWC becomes ASF editor to the death of
> Galaxy Magazine, which I think might have been to North American
> short SF what the death of SPI was to wargaming. Dunno if it
> a strong case or a good one but I think I could make it.
But I don't thing there's a single wave of "up" and then "down" in the
short story field. It's easy to remember that all the great stories were
published in the past. That's because we know about them now because they
have been anthologized. We forget that they shared magazine space with many
thoroughly wretched stories.
I love the EC horror comics. I first read them in an anthology. But when I
started reading the reprints issued a few years ago, I realized that while
there were plenty of great ones, and many good ones, they shared space with
some pretty dull stories.
> Why did short science fiction become unreadable [in the
> mass] in recent decades?
I found that what happened to me was that I didn't like the tastes of some
of the major editors as much. For example, I was more of a fan of the
Shawna McCarthy years of Asimov's. (BTW she has another magazine now. <g>)
But you can always find another magazine -- or an anthology. With short
fiction, there's always a chance that even if you hate some of the stories
in the magazine, you will enjoy some of the others.
I'm not prepared to cast all short fiction from all recent decades into the
dung heap. I enjoy novels more in general -- but still, some of my best
moments have come from reading short fiction.
Short fiction has always provided a sort of "backup" to me -- or perhaps a
harbor. Last night, I couldn't find anything I wanted in the SF/fantasy
section. Well, I found things, but put them back. One poor seemed a bit too
cliched, another seemed too deep and depressing... When I get in that mood,
the only thing that has a chance of interesting me is a good anthology. Or
a magazine.
Short stories are still a great way to find out if you like a certain
author without having to put all that time into reading a novel. Also, some
ideas are simply more suited to short fiction. Unfortunately, certain
writers these days are puffing those ideas into novels!