Awesome Rejections

March 30, 2012

One of the most important skills to being a writer is the ability to deal with rejection. Understanding that  an editor choosing to pass on your work is not personal, and that you will receive a lot more rejection slips than acceptance letters.

Every publication deals with rejections differently. The most common are form rejections. You get a very generalized note that looks something like this:

Dear Author,

Thank you for sending us “Story Title Here.” Unfortunately have have decided not to publish it. Please feel free to submit more of your work to us in the future.

The Editors.

Or some variation of above. It’s short, impersonal and to the point–but it gets the job done.  Some markets will offer small bits of personalized feedback in order to offer encouragement or–better yet–let the writer know about some specific flaw in their story that contributed to its rejection.

But who says rejections have to be boring? There’s a way to inject humor, originality and outright strangeness into the mix!

Consider the famous Rolling Stones rejection sent by Hunter S. Thompson in 1971 (warning: do not click on this link if you’re easily offended by profanity). Had I been on the receiving end of this I would be framing that thing up on my wall. I should probably do that anyway, and look at it any time I get a rejection of my own. I think it’d make me feel better.

Then there’s this poetic rejection, riffing off W.C. Williams:

This is just to say we have taken some plums

we found in our mailbox.

You were hoping it would be

yours. Forgive us,

others seemed

sweeter

or colder

more bold

or whatever.

Again, this is a “make your day a little brighter” kind of bit, at least when you’re seeing it for the first time.

But my favorite form rejection (and the one that prompted me to write this blog post) is one not being used by any magazine or anthology. It is a hypothetical rejection letter written by a friend and fellow New York SF writer Anatoly Belilovsky.  If I’m ever in position of some editorial authority, I hope to make use of the following, at least once:

Your stories soar like birds,

I wish I could acquire ’em,

but I seek only words

fit for an aquarium.

 

 


New Sales & A Milestone Achieved

March 24, 2012

I have a couple of recent sales to report.

A new publication titled “Nine” picked up my post-singularity flash story “Putting It All Together” for their inaugural issue. “Nine” has an ambitious concept – they will buy 9 short stories per issue and pay each author a royalty of 9% of gross sales. There’s also an advance against royalties, so authors are paid something for their work regardless of the publication’s success.

Issue 1 lineup has been announced and features stories by such notables as Ken Liu and Peter Swanson, among others. It will be available for sale in April and I can’t wait to see how their business plan pans out.

Yesterday I also found out that Nature magazine will be publishing “Ravages of Time” in their Futures section. This is very exciting for a number of reasons.

First of all, Nature has, by far, the largest circulation of any publication that has published me so far, online or in print. It is a highly respectable print publication, that will not only print my story with awesome original artwork created just for it in their magazine, but will also post it online and likely podcast it as well. Finally, this marks my third SFWA-qualifying sale, which means I will be able to upgrade my SFWA membership from Associate to Active, definitely an item straight off of my bucket list.

And to make it even more exciting, the voting deadline for the Nebula awards is March 30 — so I may yet get to vote this year, depending on how quickly my membership upgrade is processed.

 


“The Take” now live at DSF

March 19, 2012

For those of you who aren’t e-mail subscribers (shame on you!), “The Take” is now live on the Daily Science Fiction web site and can be read by following this link.


RealFeel Technology Implications

March 13, 2012

Warning: The following post contains spoilers about “The Take.” If you haven’t read it yet, you may want to avoid reading further until you do. 

Since “The Take” was e-mailed out by DSF yesterday, I received a lot of wonderful feedback. Some people loved the story, some hated it (as is always the fact with such things), some enjoyed it overall but had issues with certain aspects of it. 

Several readers took issue with the main character claiming that no one would want to watch movies or plays once RealFeel recordings became available. Dani Atkinson sent me a wonderful e-mail which, while critical of this aspect of the story, was an amazing examination of possible uses for RealFeel as it pertains to the arts. With Dani’s permission, I’m quoting it in full:

 Just received and read The Take. It fascinated me, but kinda frustrated me too. See, the story has the line “Who would bother to watch another movie or play, after that?” Which would make sense on the face of it, except…

Why would anyone read a book, when they could see it acted out in a play?

Why would anyone watch a play, now that there are movies?

Why would anyone watch a movie, now that there are video games?

But people DO. See, old art forms NEVER GO AWAY. They offer different experiences, that people seek out at different times and for different reasons.

And all I could think of while reading this story of this failed actor was how this technology would have REVOLUTIONIZED acting, instead of killing it.

Have you ever acted? In say, community theatre? It’s an incredible high. The adrenaline rush is every bit as intense as climbing a mountain. How many people dream of being actors? Who WOULDN’T pay top dollar for the chance to feel what it’s like to be a Broadway legend or a star of the silver screen?

And the really hardcore method actors, the ones who make a point of forcing themselves to really feel what the character feels, living the role from the inside out… I could see those guys as both the RealFeel’s biggest customers AND some of the biggest content generators.

This could bring live theatre from the audience perspective to dizzying new heights as well. For decades it’s been lamented that recordings can never truly capture the experience of live theatre. What if they could? I would have sold ORGANS for the chance to be in the audience at Patrick Stewart and Ian McKellan’s “Waiting for Godot.” I would happily shell out cash for a RealFeel recording from somebody who was.

And as for movies… my god. Just… My god…

Can you fathom… can you IMAGINE… if every single time you watched Star Wars… was your VERY FIRST TIME?

I could see parents sitting their kids down to watch timeless classics, and strapping those things to their heads so they would always be able to recapture that glorious first experience. Until the copyright lawyers finally caught up and banned the practice.

Hell, I could see filmmakers deliberately selecting an audience of people that they knew were exactly the sort to be thrilled to pieces by whatever film they’re peddling in order to make and sell their OWN RealFeel recordings.

It could be a whole new format. The RealFeel edition. “Star Wars IV: A New Hope, As Watched By an Enthralled Ten Year Old Child.” “Artsy Classic That You Always Felt Guilty For Not Enjoying As Much As You Thought You Should, As Enjoyed By An Intellectual Film Historian And Critic Who Is Totally Geeking Out”

I could see some filmmakers refusing to release movies in anything BUT RealFeel, once they had a taste of that level of control over an audience’s responses and experiences. That could get creepy pretty fast. And conversely you’d get the rebel filmmakers who are all retro and refuse to have anything to do with RealFeel and it’d be like the current 3D or not 3D debates except more so.

Heh. So, the story fascinated me enough that I tracked your blog down so I could argue at you, but it felt like a bit of a missed opportunity. In my personal canon, I’m pretty much deciding that the protagonist in The Take is using Charlie Tan as a convenient excuse for why his career never took off, and willfully ignoring the actors who are doing just fine in a post RealFeel age. 😛

Dani’s assumption is pretty spot on. When writing this story I imagined the main character as a bit of a failure–he didn’t succeed in his career as an actor, and is also very low on the totem pole as RealFeel recording artist–which is why he’s involved in the third-rate production described.

The main character blames others for his problems, but this is him speaking and not the author. I don’t think future entertainment technologies (RealFeel? Holodeck?) will eliminate the need for books, plays and other pre-existing art forms for much the same reasons quoted above.

Also, it sounds like there will be a podcast version of “The Take” in a few months. I won’t go into details until this is finalized, but I’m thrilled that there are folks out there who liked the story well enough to want to produce it.


Publication: “The Take” in Daily Science Fiction

March 11, 2012

Image

 

 

Those of you who subscribe to e-mails from Daily Science Fiction will receive my flash SF story “The Take” late tonight. Subscription is free, so you should sign up! And if you’re one of those holdouts who don’t like receiving free, awesome stories via e-mail, you’ll be able to read this story on DailyScienceFiction.com in one week.

“The Take” was inspired by the “Memory Eater” anthology. Although the story made it to the final round of consideration there, they ultimately passed on it. I made minor changes to remove references to the Memory Eater technology and sent the updated version of the story to Daily Science Fiction. I love DSF to death and they are almost always the first to see my stories, so I was thrilled to have “The Take” accepted there.

But wait, there’s more.

There’s a supporting character in the story named Charlie Tan. It wasn’t until after the story was accepted at DSF that I realized that my character shares a name with a well-known SF blogger Charles A. Tan. The editors at DSF realized this too, and wanted to know whether the reference was intentional.

My first instinct was to change the character’s name. But the more I thought about it, the more amused I became by the coincidence. So instead of changing the name, I reached out to Mr. Tan and asked his permission to leave it in. He was amenable to the idea and has officially become the first person to be tuckerized in one of my stories.

So read “The Take” and, if you enjoyed it, be sure to stop by the DSF Facebook page and leave a comment. Because I almost always have another submission in their slush pile, and a well-received story can’t possibly hurt 🙂


Guest Post on Write1Sub1.com

March 7, 2012

Sorry the blog hasn’t been very active lately. I was away for a family vacation in Key Largo, FL, where I enjoyed all sorts of cool stuff such as kayaking, visiting an alligator farm, and watching awesome sunsets like this one:

 

I did not, however, get a nearly as much writing done a I would have liked. And now I’m preparing for yet another trip next week, to a conference in Las Vegas. Will this cut into my writing time? Almost certainly. I’m trying to make up for it as much as possible this week, and I’m definitely keeping up with writing one new story per week so far, but I’m not racing ahead of my self-imposed schedule with submissions and writing as I have been in the first six weeks of the year.

 

 

Some of that “getting ahead” writing included penning a guest blog for Write1Sub1.com which went live today. It’s about the submission metrics and I make the case for setting yourself clear submission goals in addition to word count/story total goals. My 2012 submission total stands at 48 as of today, well ahead of the benchmarks I set for myself at the beginning of the year. If I continue at this pace, I may just have to challenge myself with a higher submission goal. Would 366 submissions be utterly insane? That’s one for every day of this leap year. I won’t commit to that just yet, but will reexamine my goals in another month or so to make sure they’re ambitious enough to make me work harder, yet achievable.