ellen_datlow | Vote vote vote--and rec rec rec rec

Vote vote vote--and rec rec rec rec

Ok. Here's my impassioned plea/push/nag for anyone who reads this blog and is eligible to recommend stories and or novels for the various peer group science fiction, fantasy, and horror awards.
I know that some people feel that awards themselves are a bad thing and that they should all be abolished. I'm not talking to you. I don't believe that and I know I'm not going to change your minds.

Awards are NOT going to go away but they could become less visible (which I think is a bad thing). As an editor I really appreciate it when the stories/books I edit make final award ballots and win awards. And I think most writers are even more appreciative of this. It gives a sense of validation for what you're doing by your peers (for the Nebula and Stoker).

Right now is "award rec season" and there are discussions on both the SFWA Bulletin Board and the HWA Bulletin Board about how their respective awards are dying --not enough members are recommending works to even make a preliminary ballot.

Now some people think that this might be because no one likes the work being published.
Others that no one is reading enough short fiction to be interested in recommending works in those categories.
I have a really difficult time believing the first reason. I've been reading sf/f/h short fiction for twenty five years and have found no drop off in quality in any of those fields.

I can't answer for the second but I hope it's not true because if so my profession will die and I love editing short fiction.

If you care at ALL for the genre short story then I urge you to recommend the stories that you think are worth bringing to the attention of your peers.

This is totally off the cuff and I know if I thought about it more I'd have more to write--but I'd also probably just delete the whole post...

Comments welcome!

Threaded | Top-Level Comments Only

Again, coy or stupid? I didn't equate "likes to read a lot" as "outside world hostility"; I was alluding to the common theme in fannish biographies of being an isolate interested in escape-through-consumption. This sort of thing often leads to a rather defensive reactions to the idea of, oh, I dunno, "elitism", "literary fetishism", and other things that people who actually like to read a lot like, as adults.

Also, I grew up in the middle of New York city and had all of five channels. When I moved to Long Island, that number when down to three. It's not that huge a difference.

The comparison I'd have in mind is how American car makers failed to adapt to changing customer desires and what happened when overseas manufactures gained access to the North American market. Or for that matter, why consumer electronics have such a strong Asian component.

As long as the Chinese can't gain access to the North American market, it doesn't matter what they are doing but as manga have showed, language is not necessarily an insurmountable barrier.

I can think of a significant number of changes superhero comics made.

They shifted away from newsstand sales and towards specialty/direct sales.

They raised the prices significantly in an attempt to increase margins.

They created trade paperbacks and with a product mix: b/w reprints of older material (aiming for the lifelong reader), color reprints of recent material, and TPOs.

They stopped self-regulating content.

You can wave away "more lurid and a lot more expensive" but those are two major changes to the product (of several) tied directly to the attempt to cultivate a different audience than the traditional one of male children.

So, I repeat my question: what other sector of the trade periodical business would allow 5-20% decreases in circulation per annum for a decade without making any notable changes to the product, in either its content, design, price, format, name, etc.?

Can you name ANY?

Two more swings, batta batta batta.

Magazines aren't as price-of-production oriented as cars or consumer electronics, unless SFW is a 500 page slick with 70% ads, along the lines of Vogue.

Nope, sorry.

Indulged in all the usual sorts of things like playing sport, underage drinking, parties, girls, bike riding, boardgames, pontoon, video game consoles in the pub, etc., just like anyone else, really.

People who like to read a lot, particularly where you live it seems are seen as freakish nerds to start with, aren't they, compared to the barely managed to get the bimonthly book they read crowd finished?

You're gonna need to sit down for this one, ace.

The bimonthly book crowd ARE our nerds.

Try two a year.

And the two a year crowd are considered the "readers."

Millions upon millions of adult Americans read nothing that isn't about carbohydrates, Sudoku, or shaved vaginas.

Oh come now, I'm sure they also read about celebrity scandals.

I guess I had in mind the shaved and oddly camera-ready vaginas of Hilton, Spears, Lohan et al.

It's not like you to use space on your own strengths that might be spent on other people's weaknesses, Nick; I think you're slipping.

(Though, come to think of it, I already know why I don't read the traditional SF venues, and it would probably be more useful to me in the long run to hear more about why I should read CW. Though less entertaining in the short run.)

You can read CW or not. We're not one-at-a-timin' hyah, we's mass communicatin.'

It is true that many venues have circulations so minute that a handful of readers makes a big difference. It is also true that not a few readers have embraced a consumptionist aesthetic because of this; thus plopping down at cons and on messageboards and whatnot and making demands of editors and publishers and booksellers (Shocklines is notorious here, as you may have seen from my journal). I've also seen people declaring "boycotts" of one (i.e., not a real boycott) against writers such as Orson Scott Card, and engaging in all sorts of other telling actions: they really think that one person's decisions in a marketplace matter.

And when a mag has only a few subscribers, that may be even true. But that's not a workable model if one is looking for a broader audience. For a cult, sure, then it makes sense to stand in the airport and hand out pamphlets, but I'm not looking for a lifetime of engagement or to provide someone with a cultural index for their lifestyle, I'm looking for people who, when they hear about a good story online for free, go and read it.

Of course, by denying Moles' request, you've also inadvertantly thumbed your nose at everyone else who might be reading the thread...

(or you could provide a link to a story or two which you're particularly proud of and/or represent what you're trying to do.)

Oddly enough, I came back to this thread this morning and started participating again because Ellen intimated that by not pretending that the world was full of good stories I was slapping everyone I ever published in the face. (Apparently, I am only capable of publishing average stories, not stories that belong to the small minority of excellent stories written each year.)

To link to a handful of stories that I am particulary proud in a public venue would actually involve slapping the writers I've published across the face. Not gonna do it, sorry.

As far as this: "Of course, by denying Moles' request, you've also inadvertantly thumbed your nose at everyone else who might be reading the thread..." you prove my point. Individual readers in the SFnal hardcore think that they have massive power in the marketplace, generally because they operate under the belief that their actions are identical to or represent the actions of many many others.

This is not the case. This is a fishbowl, not the world. We shouldn't confuse the two, especially if we're looking for a broad audience.

Moles can take a few seconds out of the day to read CW if he likes. If he doesn't, that's fine too. But I'm not going to respond to "Dance, monkey, dance! Maybe I have a penny in my pocket, and you have to dance for it!" not when the pennies flow freely anyway.

I'm certainly not going to start dancing in a manner that would involve me smacking the writers I've published across the face.

Well, I can understand worrying about slighting every author except for one or two.

But as for the rest: you're assuming that you even have the attention of the fishbowl.

But as for the rest: you're assuming that you even have the attention of the fishbowl.

Then why should I be concerned about "thumbing my nose" at "everyone else who might be reading this thread" if I don't have their attention?

Clearly, I shouldn't.

So, given that you have argued within the course of just two comments that by not dancing for Moles I've insulted everyone who might be reading the thread (because they'd all have identical reactions, of course!) AND that I'm just assuming that anyone is paying attention, would you mind if I ask if you have a position here, or is this just a game of "Say the opposite of whatever Nick says, so he'll pay attention me"?

"reading your stories at CW" attention, silly, not "oh look Nick's on a soapbox" attention. You can use the latter to generate some of the former. And marketing-wise, I assume you would prefer people to read your stories rather than your lj-comment rants?

Since Nick is too busy quoting Coen brothers to answer: because Nick is pulling the best out of the slushpile, without too much regard for name-recognition? So he tends to publish the best stories from a lot of the same up-and-coming talent you see at, say, SH. Except that Nick's editorial "voice" is very different from the SH guys; if you're looking for something short, dynamic, dark, and well-written, Nick's selections at Clarkesworld are a good place to get a quick 4000-word hit.

Ah no, now I get you. Thanks for explaining. Now, onto cases. I certainly don't want to do more than find the best stories from around the world, announce them in my blog on the first of each month of course, and let the chips fall where they may (with Neil and Sean and other stakeholders doing their work as well in making sure the stories are reviewed, read, etc.). I don't think hyping CW frequently on lj would be at all effective for a number of fairly complex reasons, not the least of which being the onrushing Singularity of Spam: one day I'll refresh my friends page and EVERY post will be hyping some link or other to click on. (I call is The Myspace Effect.)

From my POV, and you can read more about this in the intro to the Realms antho collecting the first year of stories when it is released late this month, the important thing about a website is the sort of story published, as far as generating a broad readership.

As far as the attention of the fishbowl in that case, the visitor stats show me that I have a fair chunk of it, and even better, an audience that ranges more widely than the hardcore of SF short fiction readership.

I don't solely want a deep readership, as that would involve too much competition from other sources (not just the other magazines out there, but Harry Potter fanfic and whatnot) and don't think the key to getting a wide readership is first cementing the deep readership. Indeed, I think that at this late date, the deep readership is so entrenched in its private language that a significant amount of SF is entirely incomprehensible to many many excellent readers.

No argument there. There seems to be no one to prevent this...all you can do is pay attention to recommendations by people whose taste dovetails with your own.

If you look at any past volume you can see the magazines I think are worth reading. I feel a little uncomfortable raving about stuff in the year I'm reading it...I'll consider it though.

Someone may have already responded to this(I've been out all day) but if not: I believe that as a member of the year before you can nominate...in order to vote for the final ballot you have to be a member of the forthcoming Worldcon.

Nick, so you're saying you actually read everything published in the field of fantastic fiction? If not, how would you know?

I don't see your point--most of my original anthologies have paid royalties over the years--one has been paying out royalties for over fifteen years. Another has been paying out for six years now.

No, are you saying that you do? I know you make a solid attempt to read all the short fiction, but that you also don't have much of an opportunity to read a large number of novels.

However, one doesn't have to read Every Story EVAR in order to have an informed opinion. I do read a heck of a lot of stories, and more this year than last as I am now once again local to an SF specialty shop that gets the obscure stuff and small zines, and in one of the most heavily serviced areas for bookstores in the country.

I don't read everything, but given the amount I do read and the markets I do read, it would be a bizarre demographic quirk wherein almost all the best stuff is somehow only published in the magazines and by the publishers I miss.

Thanks for coming by. I think a big problem is that the perception is that contemporary sf/f is defined by "the big three"--and that's wrong. The field consists of many magazines plus original anthologies) that are publishing all types of fantastic fiction. I like some of the stories in the "big three" but do I think the stories in those magazines are more deserving of awards than those in other venues? Often not. I think it's crucial for readers to see what else is going on outside the usual places they read.

The point had nothing to do with your sales and everything to do with the fact that I was asked to hand over privately held business information to some random stranger on the Internet.

He was trolling me; I called him on it. You're not being trolled here, so of course he didn't demand to see your royalty statements, or for that matter the spreadsheets or notes you keep while reading stories all year for YB, etc.

Threaded | Top-Level Comments Only

Page 5 of 8

Vote vote vote--and rec rec rec rec

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject