(
ellen_datlow Apr. 16th, 2008 12:07 pm)
"One of the many perennial arguments in the science fiction blogosphere centers on the health of the short fiction market, so we turned the Mind Meld microphone to people in the field and asked them:
Q: Nobody questions the relevance of genre short fiction, but there is some debate about the health of the market itself. From your perspective, is the short fiction market in trouble? If not, why the debate? If so, what is the cause?"
David Moles, Kristine Kathryn Rusch, Robert Reed, Mary Robinette Kowal, Sarah Langan, Neal Asher, Jeffrey Ford, Paolo Bacigalupi, A.M. Dellamonica, Rudy Rucker, Abigail Nussbaum, Jason Sizemore, Charles Coleman Finlay take on the question:
Mind Meld
Q: Nobody questions the relevance of genre short fiction, but there is some debate about the health of the market itself. From your perspective, is the short fiction market in trouble? If not, why the debate? If so, what is the cause?"
David Moles, Kristine Kathryn Rusch, Robert Reed, Mary Robinette Kowal, Sarah Langan, Neal Asher, Jeffrey Ford, Paolo Bacigalupi, A.M. Dellamonica, Rudy Rucker, Abigail Nussbaum, Jason Sizemore, Charles Coleman Finlay take on the question:
Mind Meld
From:
no subject
Sadly, the genre magazine market, online and offline, reached that level years ago, and it's not going to get better. If anyone outside the genre community thought that financing a science fiction magazine was viable or even sane, then Conde Nast and Time Warner would have put out their own titles a decade ago.
From:
no subject
But all in all, I don't see how this relates to the marketability of genre magazines....
From:
no subject
It's pure economics: we have fewer publications able or willing to host the work that gets submitted, and even fewer people willing to pay to keep those publications afloat, but lots and lots of established and wannabe writers who continue to flood the slush piles, all full of a lottery ticket buyer's certainty that they're going to be the special ones. It's a precarious system even when the retail system supporting this little game is running well, and if Borders decides to sell and the only buyer is a liquidator, well, things are going to get even uglier than they currently are.
From:
no subject
Also, I'm not saying you're wrong about readers other than would-be submittors buying the magazines, but where is your evidence of this? Just hearsay and anecdotes aren't good enough.
From:
no subject
Definitely there are some readers that are not would-be contributors--perhaps even many. But if all the would-be contributors were subscribers, the industry would look very, very different. I wish I had an easy way to match orders database up with my submissions database, but the data is very non-normal. Even emails aren't very trustworthy so far as that goes, but it could be interesting to see what the data looks like, anyway. Hmm. :)
From:
no subject
I definitely feel that.
I think I've heard of a place or two that have done that, but I don't remember who or where, so it could have been a dream. Or perhaps subscribing meant you could submit more or got a fast track or something.
Then, these magazines keep sprouting up with the lottery ticket buyer's certainty that they're going to be the special ones, too. ;) Build a quality product, build a reputation, not make the mistakes of your forebears... we're not immune from it, either. :)