Hi all,

Following on from the "100 authors" thread the other day, I was interested in the pros and cons of getting published in literary mags etc. for no money.

I noticed some members seemed against publishing without being paid (although I realise some of that argument was more focused on that particular project which is obviously a separate topic!), but I know some other prominent members are often published in lit mags, and freely admit they earn practically nothing from their writing, despite the fact that it is top quality stuff!

I have no strong opinions about this myself, but was interested to hear the arguments for (and possibly against)this, and what are the likely pitfalls, etc.

Also - and I am in no way denigrating anyone's achievements with this question - do those that get into print in this way call themselves published authors, despite the fact they have not been paid? Please PLEASE don't think this is a judgmental question, because it isn't, in any way. I'm simply interested (mainly because I was considering going down this route myself!), and am not out to offend anyone!

Thanks all.

Funnily enough Nathan Bransford had something to say about this subject this week on his blog, albeit in a rather oblique way:

Put on your agent hat for a moment. Which of these two authors would you be more interested in signing: Author A has published six books, published numerous articles, and is a an award winning author.... only after some digging you find out the six books were published by a very small press with a sketchy website, the articles were published on the author's blogs, and the award was Citizen of the Year from Nowheresville, Indiana. Author B has published several works from small presses, has a killer idea for a new novel, and is ready to make the leap to a major publisher. After some digging, this is all turns out to be true. So who would you choose? Author B, right? Trick question: THEY'RE THE SAME AUTHOR. Also I made them both up. This blog gets trickier and trickier. Anyway, the moral of this bizarro example is that it is much better to be completely honest about your accomplishments but pitch yourself as being on the rise than it is to try and blow up your accomplishments into something they're not. Agents do not like it when authors try and fool them, and we can smell a turkey sale a mile away.

Personally any publication, paid or unpaid, where I don't have to pay anything upfront, would suit me. Although I do pay my dues to the Ledbury Poetry Comp. every year, with very little chance of winning, (but then it's that or waste the money playing the lottery).


- NaomiM

Thanks, Naomi!

I know it probably depends on all sorts of things, as well, such as the publication in question. I don't really have much idea about it, as I usually tend to write longer fiction, and I was interested to hear other peoples experiences/opinions.

Good old Nathan Bransford - I hadn't read him yet this week!

I'm off to do the lottery... With the standard of my poetry, I'll stand more chance of winning

Regardless of whether a sub is paid or unpaid, I think the tremendous boost one gets from seeing the story in print, is worth all the hassle. Stephen King equates submissions to magazines as 'learning the ropes' of writing, before getting stuck into novel writing. The only problem I find, is, as I am already writing novels, I have very little time - or creative energy - to devote to writing short pieces, and, unless you are very good (which a number of WWers are) you need to submit a lot of them to get a few published. But just getting the affirmation that your prose is good, by getting them chosen for publication, cannot be underestimated. I wonder if people become addicted to the rush they get from publication


- NaomiM

<Added>

...my contributions are to the anecdote pages of newspapes and magazines which are unpaid and could never be included in a covering letter, but I still get a buzz from doing it. :)

I think it's certainly worth doing - as Naomi says, partly for the personal buzz, partly for the affirmation (novels take too long...), and partly because even unpaid pubs in small mags can be worth having on your CV, depending very much on the standing of the mag. Stephen King's right, though he's talking about the US, I imagine, where there's a much bigger and livelier tradition of short fiction (they did invent the form, after all), enough to cut your teeth as a writer.

Emma

I think sometimes, if you're determined to get some work 'out there', you need to compromise your original ambition a bit. Sure, most people dream of being Zadie Smith and getting a six-figure advance from a major publisher based on the first 80 handwritten pages of their first novel, but it's not like that for most of us.

Getting things in print, however humble the publication, is good. If nothing else, when the time comes to try the major publishers, it's there as a sales point.


<Added>

What I mean is that everyone has to start somewhere, and most people don't start at the top. And for poets and short story writers, small presses are often the ONLY way in.

Ditto what Emma and Naomi have said. The other thing to consider is that, in this country, very few publishers are interested in short story collections from new authors...so if short fiction is your thing, the literary mags are the best option when it comes to building up a CV.



<Added>

I'll stick my neck out a bit (!) to answer your other question, Joanna, re what constitutes a "published" author. I don't think that I would necessarily consider payment to be the determining factor - lots of very highly regarded literary mags pay a pittance for short fiction, but what you get in kudos far outweighs the cheque they send you.

Personally (and before I get shot down here, let me say this is only my personal feeling!) I don't consider online publication to be as legit as, say, publication in a printed magazine that has a wide, paying readership. A lot of ezines seem to me to be rather too self-serving
to be taken terribly seriously...and the final product is, by definition, ephemeral (of course it's possible to print a webpage, but that's not quite the same, is it?)

Interesting thread, Joanna, thanks for starting it. As someone who knows just how hard it can be to get work accepted by some of the tougher non-paying markets, I definitely count it as being published. In fact, some of the paying venues can be easier to get into than those with professional editors but no funds. It can give your confidence a big boost, too, and - perhaps most importantly - teach you a lot about the submission/rejection process.

Tiger

Personally (and before I get shot down here, let me say this is only my personal feeling!) I don't consider online publication to be as legit as, say, publication in a printed magazine that has a wide, paying readership

I would agree with that, though I don't really know. And there are definitely lots of factors which constitute 'published' and I'm not sure that being paid is necessarily a major one (though it's nice).

Hi MF,
I agree that on the whole ezines may not be as prestigious, however, having written more than 100 articles for print newspapers and magazines one of my biggest achievements- to me- was selling a piece to Salon.com so I guess it depends on the kudos of the site?

Oh, absolutely! Salon is a fantastic site.

I was mainly referring to fiction ezines - the ones run by individuals who often use the site as a front to buttress their own work, where quality control is low and editing standards virtually non-existent.

the ones run by individuals who often use the site as a front to buttress their own work, where quality control is low and editing standards virtually non-existent

Undoubtedly such places exist, and anyone who's spent any time in this game quickly gets to learn who they are and how to avoid them. That said, some otherwise reputable places have less than great quality control (and some can be cavalier and/or aggressive in the editing department). I've found plenty of typos, for instance, in Mslexia (and I'm not the only one!=, I know). On the other hand, there are some places run by individuals with incredibly high standards, SHINE is one, Crimson Highway another. I think it's a learning curve, the same as any other part of publishing - until you try, you won't know. An open mind at the outset does help.

Tiger

'Editing standards non existent' certainly isn't my experience - without wishing to be inflammatory I've seen major howlers in print from major publishing houses that certainly wouldn't get past the best editors I know...

I wonder if people become addicted to the rush they get from publication

Yes definitely - I'm by no means as prolific as some of the many talented writes on this site - but I do get quite twitchy if I haven't had anything out there for a while.

I once had the chance to ask two of my favourite ezine editors why they did it - they said because they'd never published a story they didn't believe in - which was a major glow

Also the care and attention to detail with the rewrites for a story of mine - the exquisite illustrations they commissioned to complement it (a real artist drawing my characters - that was a huge thrill) - and to cap it all - an award nomination.

I actually earned $5 - but that so wasn't the point.

I am actually all for being an indie author - ok so I haven't got the agent and the book deal so that is easy for me to say - but arguably some of the most edgy and innovative work in my genre is coming out of the small press at the moment. I'm not there yet - but working on it.

As for published/unpublished - someone once asked me - 'do you write anything real - you know - on paper?' LOL

But being the shameless tart I am - every time I have a story online - I send the link to my mailing list and it gets read or at least yawned over - by 'everyone who knows me' - in New York and London and Australia and Germany and Ireland and New Zealand... Which is fun?

Sarah

What a lovely post from you, Sarah! It exactly captures that thrill of being published by someone who loves your work, regardless of money changing hands. When a publisher has bought a book they hope to make big bucks from, you can perhaps put a price on their enthusiasm and praise (if you're a cynic, anyway!), but there's something special about the people who did it - professionally, with care - from love of words, of writing, of discovering new talent.

Where are those drawings, so I can go drool over them?!



Tiger

In poetry, especially, I should think there is more kudos in having a few poems in the well-known magazines (The North, Smiths Knoll, PN Review etc.) than there may be in having a collection from a not-specially-admired small press. Indeed, having poems in magazines is generally seen as a necessary precursor to selling a collection to Bloodaxe or whoever, they won't take you seriously without magazine credits. What matters is what magazine, not if you were paid or not.

<Added>

p.s. does anyone know why exactly Bloodaxe is called thus? It doesn't strike me as exactly the most obvious name for a contemporary poetry publisher.