Interesting stuff.

Terry

http://www.jeremiahtolbert.com/2009/5-lies-writers-believe-about-editors/

It is very interesting, thanks for that.

Editors don’t foster new writers like they did in the old days,

Ahem, yes, i am guilty of saying that when i'm explaining to someone how hard it is to get, published...

So, can i get you a half of shandy, Terry?

Well, since I'm not a commissioning editor, that's probably about the going rate! (Can I just have the acoholic half of the shandy?)

Terry

thanks, Terry.
Susiex

We'll share, i'll have the lemonade

“Editors are just like us.” No, we’re not. You don’t have a neverending stream of bad writing coming at you day in, day out. You get to read for pleasure, selecting material that has been through at least one filter. Whereas you turn on the tap and get a stream of nice drinkable water, we put our mouths to a sewer pipe and hope to get at least one swallow that won’t give us raging diarrhea.

This is my favourite bit. Reminds me of my past. Now I only have to drink from my own sewer pipe.

<Added>

Oh god why did I write that? Sounds revolting You know what I mean!

If it’s a story about vampires, and I hate vampire stories, it’s mostly an easy rejection.

I'm so bored of vampophobia. Now it just sounds like the 'hip' thing to say. Anyway, it's zombies who are being done to death these days. Get with the program.

This is one editor. All the 'we' business was a little off-putting to be honest, but there are a few interesting points in there. (Yes, he peed me off with the vamp comment. I have a vampire story out next month).

JB

it's zombies who are being done to death these days.

Some of us only buy the editor a beer after they've printed the story

Sarah

Well, I'm one who has been fostered by both agent and editor.
I make no bones about the fact that I had very little clue what I was doing in the early days ( what's changed, I hear you shout) and that DG was in a pretty raw state when I sent it off. Both my agent and editor have been willing to work with me. They're not daft. If they think it will sell, they're preapred to put the effort in. Maybe more so than a very polished book that they know will have a very limited market.
As for the vampires thing, it annoyed me too, Waxy. Not becaus ei have any love for the long toothed buggers, though Edward Cullen is a fox, but because he knows full well that if a corking vamp tale hit his desk, he'd snap it up. Ditto a wizard school story.
There are often comments like this in crime - oh if I never see a serail killer book again! - then Child 44 comes out. Tis boolox.
HB x

This is one editor. All the 'we' business was a little off-putting to be honest

Yes, that was what initially struck me. There is an instant over-claim to declare that this is the 'truth' as though it is some kind of universal statement that applied to everyone, whereas it was actually one man's take on things.

Having said that though, it was entertaining and interesting, especially as I have no axe to grind regarding vampires.

I don't see the problem with using 'we' in an article of this tone. He does use a lot of personal examples as well. And I don't think he was saying that he personally hated vampire stories but that IF you sent a vampire story to an ed who happened to hate vampire stories... just as an example rather than specifically getting at vampire stories.

He makes good points, but I think he's spanning the Agent/Editor roles with this one article - especially lies #1 and #2 which are more in the agent's territory - which makes the 'we' a little false.

Hmmm Myrtle my dove I didn't get that from his statement, sorry. The 'I hate' bit gave it away? The truth is that in the SF industry there is an aversion to vampire stories. Many magazines declare openly that they just don't want them. The new novella, while being highly praised by Interzone, was rejected on the grounds that it was a vampire story.

'I know you've done something a little different with the myth' the editor said. 'All the same, it's a vampire story.'

That was more or less it. It's like Twilight never happened.

No to Vampophobia! No to Myth-prejudice! Equality for the undead now!

JB

Well, he's speaking as a magazine editor (e.g. the Fortean Bureau, which he references). So 1 and 2 very much do apply. Also, agents have virtually no role in magazines, and I don't think he's trying to cover what they do here. One of the beauties of the magazine system for a writer is that you deal direct with the publisher. No pesky agents trying to get you to re-write and thereby violate Heinlein's rule.

Basically, as I'm sure we all know, magazine editors look for reasons to reject a story. They don't have time to read stories. They hate it when a writer makes them read more than the first page; especially so if they end up reading the whole thing and have to buy it.

Terry

Vampires stories tend to fall into the Urban Fantasy genre, rather than SF. And since SF tends to be about things that actually could happen, it follows that most SF magazines will not respond too well to immortal neck-biters. Better to try mags like Fantasy or Realms of Fantasy or Shimmer, who take Urban Fantasy or Science Fantasy (if you can stretch that to include vampires). Which is what he's saying, really: check out what a mag actually wants before sending it to them. Most give pretty detailed likes and dislikes. Or, if they don't (e.g. Chizine: 'Dark. Well written.', then you've probably got some scope. Obviously, it helps to read as many as you can before submitting. To be honest, Waxy, I'm a little surprised you sent a vampire story to Interzone: it's a pretty 'straight' SF magazine. If your story's on the horror side, I would have thought Black Static would be more appropriate.

Terry

<Added>

Smiley face unintended, as always!