Vote vote vote--and rec rec rec rec

[ellen_datlow]

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!

Comments

[nihilistic-kid.livejournal.com]

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"?

[jamiam.livejournal.com]

"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?

[nihilistic-kid.livejournal.com]

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.

interrupting

[david-de-beer.livejournal.com]

got a headache from this "bash a Nick" thread(s), so I'm just going to pop in here cause I do want to talk a bit about actual short fiction.

Ok, so far the conversation has been all about the content of the stories currently published; granted, I'd like improvements there too. I both agree and disagree about some of the debate surrouding choice of content and manner of expression. What I do not want is everyone publishing the exact same damn thing, over and over. And I'd have to agree that core SF is far too imploded and quite thrilled at it.
Having said that, I am possibly a bit more optimistic than you are about some of the current short fiction being published, but there are prevalent trends I am not liking.
Would like to come back to content some other time, not so much the reason for my post.

Would a change in editorial and writer mindset regarding content be enough by itself to rejuvenate SF shorts and attract more readers?
For the sake of argument, let's assume content and allowed manner of expression has undergone a fundamental change in the mindsets of editors, publishers and writers. So, content is not the problem; content is fine.
The rest of the package is exactly the same as it is currently - from producing to distributing to marketing to pricing, etc.

Granted such a hypothesis (everything exactly the same as it is at present with the single exception of the content of short fiction itself) - would this alone be enough to rejuvenate the SF short medium?
See, I'm not wholly convinced content alone is enough, there's a hell of a lot plain wrong and outdated in the thinking models of how the medium is (mis)managed. That it continues to survive despite incompetence dictating direction is perhaps a small miracle, perhaps not.
Perhaps it is time for the print magazines to die completely. Is print, whether monthly, bi-annual or whatever, truly the best format for short fiction?
Remember the "Subscribe and save the zines!" debate? one of the recurrent notes being trilled all the time was "publish what people want to read."
Everyone is focusing on what is being published/ not being published as the sole problem.
I am not convinced it is the one and single problem. It is just one aspect of a whole range of problems. To begin with, letting people know a magazine exists; being accessible for curious readers to find and sample; the whole packaging and presentation.

It seems to me there is a hell of a lot more involved than just the content of published material; I cannot see a more expansive shift in editorial policies regarding their story subject matter by itself rejuvenating short fiction.

I'd be interested to hear your thoughts on this.

Re: interrupting

[nihilistic-kid.livejournal.com]

I'd say no. The digest format has to be dumped as well, the non-fiction feature well also has to be reconceptualized, and for God's sake the covers need to be adjusted.

SF magazines should try to look, feel, and read like magazines that actually sell more copies than cockfighting magaznes. And that's with keeping them in print, which is increasingly a poor idea across all sectors.