Excellent blog post by Bruce Holland Rogers on how to survive the slush pile:

http://stupefyingstories.blogspot.co.uk/2013/02/the-slush-pile-survival-guide.html

This is especially good coming from Bruce, since he is a brilliant writer who could never be accused of 'chasing the market'. I highly recommend his book on writing, too:

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Word-Work-Surviving-Thriving-Writer/dp/1931229171/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1360407448&sr=1-1

I'm sure a lot of what he says is true, but two things:

If you've got a beautiful, polished piece of mahogany, don't saw it up to make a roof beam for a carpenter. That's turning art into hack work. Find the right home, don't edit to fit.

Also, I think a lot of writers get to a certain level and then stop growing. I think they hit a kind of glass ceiling of their own making, either because their talent simply won't let them get any better or, probably more likely, they get comfortable and won't stretch themselves to get any better. Or they don't think that they can, i.e. the confidence runs out rather than the talent, or they don't think that they need to.

Just my two cents.

If you've got a beautiful, polished piece of mahogany, don't saw it up to make a roof beam for a carpenter. That's turning art into hack work. Find the right home, don't edit to fit.

I don't think that's exactly what Bruce is saying. At least, not that you should turn it into hack work. I think he means that an editor is looking for a piece that fits the magazine/anthology he's building. Your story may be a good one but it simply doesn't fit the requirements. To give a recent example, I sent a story to an anthology where the theme was the hero returning home. I had a story ready to go which I thought fitted the theme. The editor wrote back to say he thought it was a great story but my hero wasn't returning to his home exactly. I didn't fully agree but it doesn't matter; my story doesn't fit his theme. To give another example, I submitted a story to an anthology which was asking for stories exploring augmented reality. The editor said he really liked the story but it was focussed more on virtual reality; would I be prepared to change it? First, there is a difference in these two responses. The 'hero' editor wasn't suggesting I re-write and I wasn't inclined to. The 'AR' editor, on the other hand, did want the story. The question for me then was could I re-write without the story losing its integrity? I decided it could; I re-wrote, and he bought the story.

Also, I think a lot of writers get to a certain level and then stop growing. I think they hit a kind of glass ceiling of their own making, either because their talent simply won't let them get any better or, probably more likely, they get comfortable and won't stretch themselves to get any better. Or they don't think that they can, i.e. the confidence runs out rather than the talent, or they don't think that they need to.

Oh, I completely agree with this. It's something I've been thinking about a lot lately. For example, there are writing groups around, made up of writers who sell their work (some currently, others not so currently), and who work hard at critiquing each other's stories. But I don't think that necessarily means they're stretching themselves to improve. There's a kind of comfort in doing detailed critiques, which can inure you to what really needs tackling.

There are lots of levels to this, I feel. For example, in SF/Fantasy (and I'm sure other genres, too), there are writers who have sold stories regularly for years. They've made names for themselves; they're reliable, competent; they deliver something that's dependable. Yet they haven't moved forward at all. You could argue that they don't need to; they're selling their work, even winning awards. Which means we're back to that old, awkward question, what do I really want from my writing?

[quote]what do I really want from my writing?[quote]

Good question but one that will leave you with a heart ache because the truth is that the publishing world is very tight and bases a lot of its strategy on marketing. This, for me, is killing very good authors whose work should be out there.

Yes, turning your mahogany table into lumber, as the author says, is what it may be all about after all.

I totally agree. I've found this to be true as a reader as well as a writer. The reason I switched to writing short fiction was because I got fed up with editors loving my books but not being able to get them through their damn committees. A while back, I made the mistake of believing an editor when she asked me to turn a short story into a novel for her; or at least, not realising that she'd still have to get it through all those check points. Which is why I'm going to do it myself very soon. I think traditional publishing still has some purchase on promotion outlets, while self-publishers have to rely on word of mouth. But that gap appears to be closing; already many publishers are quietly scanning the self-published world for books their committees would have passed on but which it seems people actually want to read.

Traditional publishers got the first shock after the 50 Shades Phenomenon. Now I know it wasn't well written but many loved it. I'm sure that traditional publishers are hitting themselves over not picking it up and editing it and making the millions themselves. The same applies to 'The Hundred Year Old Man Who Climbed Out of The Window and Disappeared'. It was knocked back so many times yet now is a best seller.

The irony is that they pay people like Pippa Middleton to produce a book on catering and dinners a healthy six figure amount and the sales are pathetic. If they invested all that money in real authors with good stories, then we'd have better books out there.

It's a form of brainwashing the people into having them read what the editor wants - not a subjective business at all.

I write for kids and my barometer are the students in the classroom - I explain the plots to them and they DO tell me which ones to pursue and which ones not to. My current manuscript has been rejected about 10 times yet my friends ask for it so they can read it to their kids. What does that say to you? And it isn't only my work but countless other authors too.

As for your short story being turned into a novel ........ an editor said the same to me. I'm still writing it but who knows where it'll go.

I agree with Wordsmithereen about people getting stuck at a certain level and reluctant to stretch themselves. I think the only answer to rejection is to try and make yourself a better writer. You can always improve. There are always areas of weakness that you can work on - but only if you're willing to recognise them and really address them.

Maybe there's comfort and safety in not improving, because you can stay within the zone of what works for you. The other day, for example, I bumped into a video of Joni Mitchell singing 'Free Man in Paris' live, from quite some time ago; then found a video of Aimee Mann doing the same song live quite recently. Mann introduces it in quite a self-effacing way, admitting that she finds it a difficult song to play, and at the end of it apologises for 'counting' during the chord changes. Thing is, Mitchell's version is light, uplifting and buzzy. Mann's is slower, more cumbersome and doesn't really embody the sentiment of the song - which is about wishing you were free of the daily responsibilities but knowing that you can't be, really.

The reason, I believe, Mitchell's version works better is because her skills level is higher than Mann's. She pushes her baseline ability higher, which means she can produce songs that are more complex (although not boring to listen to by any means). By contrast, much as Mann has produced some good songs, her versatility is not great; therefore, her songs all tend to sound the same.

I really think it's just the same for writers.

I'm going to do it myself very soon

Care to share any more, Terry? The self-publishing group has been quiet lately, apart from Issy I mean. How are you going about it?

Well, I wrote the book, of course! Then I got a very good writer friend to beta read it. Then my partner read it, who is brilliant at picking up errors, logistic mistakes, as well as character inconsistencies, etc. I decided to publish it through Lucky Bat Books, which is run by two friends of mine in the US, who are both editors and highly skilled at electronic and self-publishing. I very much approve of their business model which in essence means the writer keeps all royalities and rights; Lucky Bat make their money from services. I feel in a stronger position with them than on my own, e.g. they have some very good writers publishing through them, like Doug Smith who's a mate of mine and a superb short story writer. I'm also in the process of getting them to re-publish and publish about 10 of my short stories - which I can do myself but not so professionally.

I commissioned Ben Baldwin to do the cover. Ben does all my short stories too. If you want to see the cover, it's at the bottom of this page: http://www.td-edge.com/fiction/ (but note this is not the final font design layout). You can see a few of Ben's other covers there, too.

I'm doing the novel as both hard copy and e-book. For that reason, I've paid Judith at Lucky Bat to do the formatting for the hard copy. I can do it for e-book but hard copy formatting is a skill I just don't have and don't want to spend the time acquiring.

Oh, and one of the reasons for re-publishing the short stories is that I'm going to include the first chapter of the book in each, as a give-away.

Terry