tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17746046.post7667937680396508284..comments2021-11-17T13:20:03.206-07:00Comments on Suzenyms: FROM THE MAIL #2Suzenymhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16780822574353097907noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17746046.post-12927380894917463282014-05-12T13:20:46.514-06:002014-05-12T13:20:46.514-06:00Hi. I think I put about 40 stories forward. Some o...Hi. I think I put about 40 stories forward. Some of us put in more (me), some less. I had to read another 70 or so stories, so about 110 made it to the second tier. So, yes, about 200 stories to read in all for each of us, and I will have to review some of them before Fight Night. <br /><br />I suppose the hope is that some day, the money will be good. But you're right - that's not why we do what we do. The biggest pay-off for writing is the doing of it, of seeing that you have created something that others will hopefully value and enjoy. It's similar with publishing, although for me, not quite so personal. Thanks for your comment. - S.Suzenymhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16780822574353097907noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17746046.post-59916115772357324492014-05-12T12:16:23.423-06:002014-05-12T12:16:23.423-06:00Thank you so much for answering my follow-ups!
So...Thank you so much for answering my follow-ups!<br /><br />So, 500 intake, then 100 or so make it to fight night and out of that, 20 - 25 get published. <br /><br />This means that every editor reads about 125 stories per intake then out of those, put (super rough) 25 stories forward to fight night. So, then each editor reads maybe another 75 other new stories that the other editors have passed along?<br /><br />This means you read about 200 stories per intake, correct? <br />And I bet you read some more than once!!!<br /><br />Wow. That’s a CrAzY amount of reading and time!<br /><br />Pro-tip -- don't go into publishing for money, do it for love, right? If you work out your hourly compensation, it's got to be miserly. Much like writing. But -- for me -- I feel like there's no other choice. I can't imagine not writing.<br /><br />Thank you!<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17746046.post-28894108233526150112014-05-08T10:21:30.112-06:002014-05-08T10:21:30.112-06:00great article.great article.Gregg Chamberlainnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17746046.post-57564499000012504112014-05-07T19:47:17.088-06:002014-05-07T19:47:17.088-06:00Of course, you can have follow-ups! I have to admi...Of course, you can have follow-ups! I have to admit to some editing, here. Originally, Diane had said over 400 stories, but I remembered it as around 500 (as in, I had about 125 stories to read, so I assumed the other three editors did, too). These numbers are approximations. I expect we will get about 20 - 25 publishable stories for which we will offer contracts. And yes, we hang on to these and publish them in subsequent issues, as an issue can only hold 7 to 10 stories, depending upon word count. Some of our writers will tell you that they have had to wait a year (or more) to see their work in print. (Even with magazines, the publishing world moves at a snail's pace.) The '100 received' refers to those that have made it to the second tier of reading and are waiting to be discussed at Fight Night. As Diane says, just because a story makes it that far doesn't necessarily mean publication. <br /><br />The word count is mentioned because we can only print so much per issue. As editors we need to keep the maximum in mind. This has to do with printing costs. Story length doesn't play a role in acceptance, but that said, we always prefer it when we can put more stories in an issue. If a story is great, it's great, and we won't notice the length because it holds our attention. In the case of two great stories, one that is 3000 words and one that is 6000 words, we are likely to buy them both. Word to the wise here: for the most part, we do draw the line at 6000 words. We have published the odd one that is over that length, but only if the writer has queried us first, and if we know their ability. Even then, we will usually work with the writer to trim the length. We tend to be sticklers about that.<br /><br />I hope this answers all of your questions! (And thanks again, for asking.) - Susan.Suzenymhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16780822574353097907noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17746046.post-22379893741222393062014-05-07T17:57:37.484-06:002014-05-07T17:57:37.484-06:00Wow! Thanks for answering all of my questions!! Th...Wow! Thanks for answering all of my questions!! That was super interesting. Many thanks.<br /><br />May I have two follow-ups??<br /><br />Diane says that, "In our recent window for submissions, we received over five hundred stories" but later says, "no more than four or five stories from every one hundred received will ultimately reach the stage where we are prepared to offer a contract."<br /><br />If I understand correctly, this suggests that if you get 500 stories that would equal 20 - 25 publishable stories, but the latest issue of OnSpec holds 7. <br /><br />So, do authors pull their stories when offered contracts or does one submission intake provide material for several editions? Or does the "one hundred received" exclude stories that haven't made it to Fight Night?? Or am I not understanding and being confused? Sorry if I am!<br /><br />The other thing I wondered about while reading the posting was this remark, "many of which were in the 5,000 to 6,000 word category." I wondered why the word count was mentioned, and if it played a role in the selection process. <br /><br />Obviously the longer the story the more effort to read it -- I get that -- but I guess my question is: it better to have a shorter story? <br /><br />If you have one really great story that is at your limit at 6,000 words, and another great story that is of equal quality in every way but is 3,000 words -- would the word count play a role in deciding which one to publish? <br /><br />Super big thank you for the posting! Educational and informative as always!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com