Sneak Preview: El and Al vs. Himmler’s Hideous Horde from Hell by Mike Resnick

June 21, 2012

I’m a huge fan of Mike Resnick’s fiction. I’ve been reading and enjoying his tales for years. His novel “Santiago” was among the first science fiction books I ever read in English. So I’m enormously thrilled to announce that Unidentified Funny Objects will feature his novelette “El and Al vs. Himmler’s Hideous Horde from Hell.”

According to Locus, Mike Resnick is the all-time leading award winner, living or dead, for short fiction. He won 5 Hugos (from a record 35 nominations), a Nebula, and other major awards in the USA, France, Japan, Spain, Croatia, and Poland. He’s the author of 64 novels, over 250 stories, and 2 screenplays, and the editor of 40 anthologies. His work has been translated into 25 languages.

The fate of the world itself hangs in the balance when the Third Reich summons super soldiers from hell to fight on their side. Now it’s up to Albert Einstein to engage his arch-nemesis Heinrich Himmler in a battle of sorcery that may well determine the outcome of World War II. With a little help from America’s greatest warrior — Eleanor Roosevelt.

Here’s an excerpt:

“Mein Gott, you’re big!” exclaimed Himmler as he looked at the army Satan had supplied.

There were thirteen of them, each blond and blue eyed, each armed with a magical scimitar (which is kind of like a curved lightsaber, but effective rather than pretty), each ten feet tall, each wearing naught but a leather kilt.

“Ow!” cried the nearest as his head bumped against the ceiling, an action and a cry that was repeated twelve more times up and down the line.

“Duck your heads, dummkopfs!” snapped Himmler.

“We bow to no one!” thundered one of them. “We’ll raise the ceiling!”

So saying, he lifted his magical scimitar and punched a hole in the ceiling.

“You see?” he said with a smile. “There is nothing to it.”

Well, he tried to say “There is nothing to it,” but somewhere between “There” and “is” a huge wooden desk fell through the hole and crashed onto his head. He collapsed beneath it, shoved it off to a side, and got groggily to his feet.

“Maybe I should have sacrificed two newts,” muttered Himmler.

P.S. I promise, the next few stories I’ll be unveiling feature absolutely no Nazis whatsoever.

Comments Off on Sneak Preview: El and Al vs. Himmler’s Hideous Horde from Hell by Mike Resnick | Publishing | Tagged: , , | Permalink
Posted by Alex Shvartsman

Sneak Preview: Moon Landing by Lavie Tidhar

June 19, 2012

We’re hard at work reading submissions for Unidentified Funny Objects. I accepted four stories so far, with several more held in the final round of consideration. Tonight, the first contract was signed (and the first payment made), so I can finally announce one of the stories that will be published in UFO: Moon Landing by Lavie Tidhar.

 

 

Lavie Tidhar has been nominated for a BSFA, British Fantasy, Campbell, Sidewise, World Fantasy and Sturgeon Awards. He is the author of Osama, and of the Bookman Histories trilogy, as well as numerous short stories and several novellas.

Here’s a brief excerpt from Moon Landing, though I caution that it doesn’t really do the story justice:

Neil and Buzz stand on the surface of the moon.

“Houston? We have a problem . . .”

“Ja,” a new voice says. The new voice has patched into their comm. units. The new voice comes from the leader of the men facing the Eagle. There are a dozen of them. They all wear spacesuits. They are all armed. On each suit there is a patch, and on the patch is a swastika.

“Ja,”’ the voice says. It has a German accent. “You have a problem.”

Assuming that the edits are done and the contracts are signed in time, I will unveil another accepted story next week.  Later this week I will post more about the submissions we’ve been getting — along with some statistics.

 

Comments Off on Sneak Preview: Moon Landing by Lavie Tidhar | Publishing | Tagged: , , | Permalink
Posted by Alex Shvartsman

Anthology Update – Our Reading Process

June 17, 2012

This is what happens to stories that are submitted for publication in Unidentified Funny Objects.

Round 1

I open all incoming mail and read the submissions first. At this stage I’m looking at a couple of things:

* Is the story well-written?

So far almost every submission I received clears this benchmark with ease. Then again, that’s because submissions have been open to SFWA and Codex members and you don’t get to join those without a considerable amount of skill. I’m also OK with some minor problems/issues that we can fix in editing.  You will never get rejected because of a typo or because of 1-2 awkward sentences. Of course, if the manuscript is riddled with both, that’s another story.

* Is there a coherent story arc and a good ending?

This is where many of the submissions fail for me. In some cases (often in flash stories) they’re a delivery system for a joke or a clever idea the author had. In other cases the setup is great and the story is interesting, but it peters out in the end. Endings are *hard* to do well and it’s disappointing to see a story which shows a lot of potential early fail to live up to that potential on the last page.

* Is the story funny?

In order to be considered for UFO, the story has to be humor, and not merely lighthearted. To paraphrase a comment one of the associate editors made on a recent submission: “A story with a bit of character-based humor isn’t a ‘humorous story’ no matter how much you want five cents per word.” A large percentage of submissions are rejected because, while they’re good, competently written stories, they aren’t particularly funny.

“But Alex,” you might say, “everyone’s sense of humor is different. What if it isn’t funny to you but hilarious to lots of other people?”

Or, to quote the submission guidelines from Daily Science Fiction, one of my favorite SF ‘zines: “one alien’s funny bone is located near another species’ sac of indifference.”

I’ve tried to solve this problem by utilizing a panel of readers.

Which brings us to:

 

Round 2

Stories that I like enough to consider publishable (including some that I don’t find very funny but suspect others might) are advanced into the second round of consideration.

I strip all author information from the document and pass them along, anonymously, to a panel of readers. Why, you ask? I want stories from unpublished authors to be given the same consideration as those from Nebula nominees. In fact, several submissions from actual Nebula nominees met an ignoble end in the second round thus far.

Each associate editor reads the story and sends me their vote and their comments. They can vote “No,” ‘Yes,” or “Maybe.” The “Maybe” vote is reserved for those stories where the reader thinks it might be good but its sense of humor doesn’t align with their own, or stories that someone is genuinely on the fence about. You’d be surprised at how often the “Maybe” vote is used.

Readers are encouraged (but not required) to provide a few sentences of comments on the submission, especially if their vote is a no.  If the story is rejected in the second round I provide some of that feedback to the author, so they may consider it (or not) for making possible changes before they send their story on to the next market.

So far we’ve kept stories in round 2 anywhere between two days and eight days. Everything is read quickly, but some are more difficult decisions than others. Occasionally there’s quite a lot of back and forth between us on a particular story. One of us might champion a specific submission that others didn’t like as much, and vise versa.

 

Round 3

Stories with a high percentage of “Yes” votes (and not a single one has been unanimous yet) are advanced into the third round of consideration and I e-mail the author a ‘Hold Request’ — asking permission to sit on their story until early September. At that time the remaining slots in the table of contents will be filled with these stories.

Why make people wait so long? Suppose an author submitted a good, funny story about time traveling to the 1950’s. The story advanced through the rounds and was held. But then, another author submitted a story that is absolutely brilliant, and it also happens to be a 1950’s time travel piece. We’re very unlikely to publish two similar stories, and so the former one has to be released.

Other considerations such as available space and variety (I want a mix of genres and styles) also come into play.

Not every story has to wait until September. On very few occasions the story is so amazing that I *know* I want to include it, no matter what.  These stories get accepted early and we begin work on the copy-editing and contract process.  Several acceptances have been sent out, and I hope to begin announcing them as early as this coming week

 

Comments Off on Anthology Update – Our Reading Process | Publishing | Tagged: , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Alex Shvartsman

Anthology Update – June 11

June 12, 2012

I enjoy writing humor. Many of my stories are the kind of fluffy, light fare that doesn’t take itself too seriously. And I run out of markets to submit them to all too quickly.

“There aren’t enough humor markets” is the complaint commonly heard at conventions, on writing forums, and any other place where two or more writers happen to be at the time. There are great magazines that accept humorous stories, but when you compare their number to those looking to publish dark fantasy or horror, it isn’t close. I’ve grumbled about this enough times myself, until I realized that I can actually do something about it. And thus, an anthology of humor SF/F was born.

One of my goals in setting up this project was to avoid some of the frustrating issues that plague many of the fledgling markets. To that end, I’m doing the following:

* Full disclosure. My credentials, staff list, rights sought and all other details are spelled out in the submissions guidelines.  I will post regular updates here and on my Twitter account (@AShvartsman)

* High quality cover, professional typesetting and copy-editing. I want the final product to look as good as anything released by one of the big New York publishers.

* Treat the writers right. I’m paying $0.05 per word, and I’m paying it on acceptance so the authors don’t have to wait until winter to get their money.  I’ll strive to respond to submissions and queries quickly and keep authors abreast of what’s going on with their stories as they advance — or don’t — through three rounds of consideration (explained in the guidelines). Each contributor will get both an e-copy and a physical printed copy of the book upon release.

Thank you for the many awesome title suggestions. Ultimately I went with “Unidentified Funny Objects,” courtesy of Nathaniel Lee.  Things have been progressing nicely. Submission guidelines are posted and I’m getting ready to read your stories. In fact, I’ve been reading submissions already. I reached out to a number of excellent authors directly asking them to submit something. I also opened submissions early to members of SFWA and Codex Writers and have been reading furiously for over a week.

Sending out rejections is the worst part of the job. Having to reject friends, colleagues, people with whom I’ve been commiserating about other markets’ rejections and response times is especially brutal. But I’ve been doing it. So far I managed to get back to almost everyone within 24 hours with either a rejection or a note advancing their story to the second round. I also managed to provide at least some feedback with most rejections — a luxury I may not be able to afford once the general submissions open and the volume increases exponentially. But it’s all been worth it because of the stories I’m not rejecting.

There are several stories that I like a lot and am strongly considering for inclusion. I asked those authors for permission to hold on to their stories until the end of the submission period, to see if I can fit them into the Table of Contents.

There are also a couple of stories I absolutely loved and know I want to buy, right away. I’ll be sending those authors acceptance letters and contracts soon, and will be announcing their names here soon.

Comments Off on Anthology Update – June 11 | Publishing | Tagged: , , | Permalink
Posted by Alex Shvartsman

Next Entries »