Hi mates,

I'm bit anxious. On dated 6th of this month I received a reply from the magazine editor; she liked my flash fiction and gave some positive comments on that. She also said to make me few changes in it and also wrote me that she would be happy to consider it again on resubmitting. I did all the things that should be needed in my short piece of work and have submitted the same on the third day. But I’m yet to get her confirmation. Now one and half weeks have already passed and I’m still waiting her response.

I’m beginning to think what if she rejected me work. I’m anxious about it cuz it would be my first publication in the magazine. What should I do? Should I bother her again, or just wait for some days more. I noticed she has only two weeks to respond.

Please help.


Michael

If the editor normally sends a confirmation they've recieved a submission and you haven't recieved one, then resubmit.
If, however, you mean a personal confirmation acknowledging the edits, then that may depend on how you sent your email. If it was a reply on the original correspondance thread between you and the editor then you can probably safely assume they've recieved it. If, however, you sent it as a new email then they may have missed it and it's ended up in the 'slush pile' waiting to be read.

Hi NMott,

I've replied her with re-submittion with changes she wanted, no new email. Although she said she would be happhy to consider it again -- so what's it? Have you experienced when editor replies you telling she'll be angree on re-submission but later she denies? I've no idea cuz I'v no publication yet.

It may well be that she doesn't see it fitting into the current issue - which has filled up while you were revising - but she would like to keep it, and perhaps find a place for it in a later issue. It's a horrid, limbo-like place to be, but it's incredibly common with small mags.

And, of course, it may well be that she still doesn't see it quite working, and hasn't got time to frame a tactful reply. It may, indeed be, that she wants to say something helpful, but that takes time too...

Editors hate feeling chivvied (and they're always busy, so always feel harrassed). But you could drop her an email (perhaps not for a week or two), making it very clear that you're just checking she received the revised version, and you aren't looking for an answer yet. Something like:

Dear Editor; I know you won't have had a chance to look at it yet, but may I just check that you received the revised version of 'My Story', which you said you'd be happy to look at? I've been having email trouble lately, and not everything I sent seems to have arrived. I'm attaching the file again, in case the last one got lost in transmission.


I'm afraid, though, that many editors of all sorts work on the don't-call-us-we'll-call-you basis, where they don't get in touch unless they want to use your work. If you resend, and still don't get an answer, it's probably because they're that kind of editor. In which case, there's no point in going on chivvying them, until you want to send the piece elsewhere, and need to know whether it's free or not.

Good luck!

Emma

Hello Emma,

Thank you very much for the suggestion, especially for the email to write the editor.

Thanks a lot.

Mox

Emma's right; editors hate being nudged, cajoled, reminded, etc. But often no news is good news in that most magazines take longer to respond with stories they're interested in than ones they're not. But it's not a hard and fast rule. To an extent you're probably suffering from anxiety because this is the closest you've come yet to publication. The best way to beat this kind of stress is to write lots of stories and keep them out there; that way, this kind of delay probably won't even register on your consciousness.

Although they get criticised a lot, Heinlein's rules of writing are still a good guide here:

1. You must write.
2. You must finish what you write.
3. You must refrain from rewriting, except to editorial order.
4. You must put the work on the market.
5. You must keep the work on the market until it is sold.

Number 3 can be tricky. It definitely doesn't mean, for example, that you should re-write a story on the basis of comments an editor makes when she's rejecting it. Ideally, a magazine editor would offer you a contract, or a strong promise of one, before asking you to re-write. But it's rarely that clear-cut. What tends to happen is they see potential in a story but want to make sure you're going to properly make necessary changes, not - as a lot of anxious writers do - simply hash out a re-write slavishly following the editor's suggestions, ending up with a story no one wants to read.

All of which means you have to take a chance as a writer. Experience helps improve your sixth sense about how serious an editor is when they ask you to re-write, but it's not an exact science. Three times, I've been asked to re-write a story and a contract resulted. Two other times, it didn't. Unfortunately, because it's such a buyer's market, you'll have to take the odd hit like that.

Terry

Thanks Terry,

Perhaps I'm suffering from anxiety. I've finished another story recently, and now I'm goin to start next. I didn't know Heinlein's rules of writing, thanks for it. I'll follow it.

Terry - why would those rules get criticised? they are sound. The only one I question is not to rewrite except to editorial order. It suggests a writer can't see, with hindsight, how a failing piece might sell better if adjusted. That aside, i love the inherent simplicity and tenacity of the advice.

Cherys, one reason they get criticised is because they're seen to fit more with the way publishing used to be, or at least how it was perceived to be. Another reason is they suggest to some people that writing is rather more about practical output than art. They would have preferred Heinlein to say something more along the lines of how it's about having a special talent, thereby 'explaining' that hard work and persistence is not really much to do with success. I heard a funny (well to me, at least) podcast recently, where this panel of young authors looked at each of Heinlein's rules in turn. Every time they started by admitting there was some wisdom in the rule, then went on to explain how times have changed since his day so the rule no longer strictly applies. Perhaps needless to say, all these authors were unpublished.

As said, rule 3 is tricky, and I don't know how Heinlein worked. I think he's mainly saying here, don't re-write to anyone's suggestion unless they're paying you. I suspect he had his own methods for ensuring a story worked before sending it out. But if he meant don't re-write according to anyone's suggestion who isn't buying the story, I agree with him. I sold a story a few months ago, that had been rejected 15 times. Along the way, I got some suggestions for what wasn't right about it, but ignored them all. The editor who bought it said it was the best story ever submitted to his magazine.

Then again, Rob Sawyer's interpretation is that Heinlein included rejecting comments too, as long as they're from editors:

This is the one that got Heinlein in trouble with creative-writing teachers. Perhaps a more appropriate wording would have been, "Don't tinker endlessly with your story." You can spend forever modifying, revising, and polishing. There's an old saying that stories are never finished, only abandoned — learn to abandon yours. If you find your current revisions amount to restoring the work to the way it was at an earlier stage, then it's time to push the baby out of the nest. And although many beginners don't believe it, Heinlein is right: if your story is close to publishable, editors will tell you what you have to do to make it salable. Some small-press magazines do this at length, but you'll also get advice from Analog, Asimov's, and The Magazine of Fantasy & Science Fiction.

Incidentally, Rob Sawyer adds a sixth rule of his own:

Rule Six: Start Working on Something Else That's my own rule. I've seen too many beginning writers labour for years over a single story or novel. As soon as you've finished one piece, start on another. Don't wait for the first story to come back from the editor you've submitted it to; get to work on your next project. (And if you find you're experiencing writer's block on your current project, begin writing something new — a real writer can always write something.) You must produce a body of work to count yourself as a real working pro. # Of our original hundred wannabe writers, only one or two will follow all six rules. The question is: will you be one of them? I hope so, because if you have at least a modicum of talent and if you live by these six rules, you will make it.

Terry