2nd Editions of the Tattooed Witch Trilogy, Finally!

The Tattooed Witch Trilogy

 

Well, it took about six months of hair-pulling frustration to learn InDesign, Kindle Create, and the ins and outs of Amazon Publishing, but here are the books of my trilogy, finally. These were first published by Five Rivers Publishing in 2013, 2014, and 2016 respectively; I regained the publishing rights; they're now 2nd editions under my imprint, the Three of Pentacles Press. (More to come from the new imprint too, but I don't want to talk about that, quite yet. I'm still deciding how deep I want to dip my publishing toes.) The trilogy is basically the same, except for a few tweaks (naturally, I couldn't leave well enough alone). 

The Tattooed Witch and The Tattooed Seer e-books include the first few chapters of the next book in the series, so if you haven't read them, those will give you a sense of where the story goes. 

The links are below. If you have a Kindle Unlimited account, you can read the books for free. Yay! :-) Of course, the books are also available as paperbacks.

1. On Amazon.ca: The Tattooed Witch: Book One, The Tattooed Witch Trilogy eBook : MacGregor, Susan: Amazon.ca: Kindle Store
2. On Amazon.com: Amazon.com: The Tattooed Witch: Book One, The Tattooed Witch Trilogy eBook : MacGregor, Susan: Kindle Store
3. On Amazon.ca: The Tattooed Seer: Book Two, The Tattooed Witch Trilogy eBook : MacGregor, Susan: Amazon.ca: Kindle Store
4. On Amazon.com: Amazon.com: The Tattooed Seer: Book Two, The Tattooed Witch Trilogy eBook : MacGregor, Susan: Kindle Store
5.  On Amazon.ca: The Tattooed Queen: Book Three, The Tattooed Witch Trilogy eBook : MacGregor, Susan: Amazon.ca: Kindle Store
6. On Amazon.com: The Tattooed Queen: The Tattooed Witch Trilogy Book 3: MacGregor, Susan: 9781988274171: Amazon.com: Books 

All three books have had good reviews, but as these are 2nd editions and the first editions are no longer available, I can't include those star reviews here. If you'd like to leave a review on Amazon.ca or Amazon.com, I'd appreciate your support. Thank you.  

Currently, I'm in the process of setting up a new website. When that's done, I'll mention it here. 

I'm also back to editing On Spec manuscripts, so I may resurrect Letters to the Slush Pile here, or I may turn them into a YouTube channel. Lots to do. I'll keep you posted.

In the meantime, stay warm, stay Covid safe, and here's to a happy and fulfilling 2022 for all of us!

All the best! - Susan. 

 

 

BACK FROM THE DEAD, AND SOME NEWS!

 

IT'S BEEN A WHILE, HASN'T IT? Like, three years since my last post. Did you miss me? I'm not sure what I can blame the lapse on - a pandemic, a bad attitude or simple ennui, perhaps a focus on other things, like painting or flamenco. 

Anyway, here I am again, resurrecting Suzenyms, and along with the blog, some news. I've registered my own imprint. Here's the new logo:

Three of Pentacles Press

Why Three of Pentacles, you might ask? The Three of Pentacles is one of my favorite tarot cards. It means mastery and collaboration. The Rider Waite deck features three people working together on a cathedral arch - a mason/sculptor, a priest, and a noble. I also like to interpret the card as combining talents, time, and people in order to create something lasting and great. What I hope to do eventually, with this imprint. 

The title above, is the first book under the new publishing name. Maybe you recognize the title - The ABC's of How NOT to Write Speculative Fiction. For a number of years, I featured the ABC's here, on Suzenyms. I've updated and rewritten them, and now they're in their 3rd edition and available as an epub for the Kindle on Amazon. You can link to the pages here: 

For Amazon.com: Amazon.com: The ABC's of How NOT to Write Speculative Fiction eBook : MacGregor, Susan: Books

And for Amazon.ca: The ABC's of How NOT to Write Speculative Fiction: MacGregor, Susan: 9781777713409: Creative Writing & Composition: Amazon Canada

Plus, the paperback is also out! Finally!

I'll also be re-releasing my anthology, The Tattooed Witch, The Tattooed Seer, and The Tattooed Queen, now that I have the rights back for all three books. They were originally published through Five Rivers Press. (Thank you, Lorina Stephens, for your validation and support). 

After I get those done, who knows? I'd like to record my trilogy on Audible. I'll probably do it, myself. We'll see. 

I'm also toying with starting a YouTube channel, based on my old Letters to the Slush Pile posts, which you can still find here on the blog. What I'd like to do is to take samples of writing submitted to me, and discuss where the prose is working, and where it still needs work. All without mentioning anyone's names, of course. If any of you out there want free editing advice, and are willing to endure an honest critique with the idea that your work might eventually be the source of a YouTube post, please contact me at threeofpentspress@yahoo.com. For now, I'm limiting my focus to short stories. I'm not quite set up for YouTube, yet. Have to learn how to handle the new vlogger camera, first. :-) But if you're interested in receiving advice from an editor of 30+ years, drop me a line, and let's see where I might help you. 

That's it for now! It's good to be back! :-)

- Susan.

LETTERS to the SLUSH PILE #22

Dear -------,

In your opening first paragraph, you were off to a great start. Your premise and description were dark and foreboding and they grabbed me. I found myself looking forward to reading the rest of your story with anticipation. Which is why I found paragraph two a bit of a disappointment (yes, I know - I'm already coming off as being annoyingly picky. 'Wow - she got stopped in paragraph two?') You're a good writer. I know this because we've published you before. So what stopped me in my tracks in paragraph two?

You start out with your first sentence describing your protagonist's action - a very specific one that draws my attention to an important object in the setting. The second sentence pulls my attention (and your protagonist's) from that to a description of the sky. The third sentence shows what a group is doing near the important object. The fourth sentence covers more action by a secondary character. The fifth sentence has the secondary character moving the group along. Then we come to the end of the paragraph.

It was a little confusing to keep track of all that was happening. Your sentences were short, and I felt jerked around, like I was being forced to dance a literary version of the polka. A little fleshing out would help, with a stronger focus on your protagonist's point of view. I also suspect you write as I do - the ideas flow from your imagination onto the page, but as they come, they aren't necessarily arriving in a smooth or logical order. You need to take a little more time to rearrange things so they hang together better. Let setting sentences support each other. Let action bits do the same. When you mix them as you've done, it's harder for the reader to keep things straight. I suspect you already know this. (I'm sure you do.) So often, we're blind to our own work. I'm already imagining you smacking your forehead and saying to yourself, 'yeah, damn it, she's right.'

I'm returning to read the rest of your story, now. If On Spec decides to buy it, I'll be making these suggestions to whomever works with you as your editor. (Who knows? That might even be me.)

All the best --------. I hope you found this letter helpful.

- Susan.

P.S. Okay, I finished reading the entire story. I liked it, but your opening has little to do with what happens. I get the feeling this piece is from a much larger work. You need to tailor this so that it reads like a self-contained short story. - S.

THE DUNNING-KRUGER BUMP (or HOW to SUCK LESS in the LONG RUN) - GUEST POST by BARBARA GEIGER

MY LAST Letter to the Slush Pile #21 GENERATED QUITE A BIT OF DISCUSSION on the I Read On Spec Facebook page. Because of it, I invited anyone who had participated to share their thoughts here on Suzenyms. I'm very pleased that Barbara Geiger took me up on my offer. Barbara is one of the brightest and most thoughtful writers I know. Twenty years ago, I had the sense that my writing wasn't at the level I wanted it to be; thirty years ago, I didn't even have the sense of how far I needed to go. There is an actual term for this - the Dunning-Kruger Effect. I'm sure you'll find what Barbara has to say, and the links she's included, very enlightening. (Thanks, Barbara, for sharing this with us):

THE DUNNING-KRUGER BUMP (or HOW to SUCK LESS in the LONG RUN) 
by Barbara Geiger:

If you are a writer and are not getting the response you want from your texts, please watch this amazing video taken from Ira Glass talking about the gap between your taste for good fiction and your ability to produce it. It’s amazing how well he articulates the frustration between knowing what good is, and not being able to create it yet.

But the gap is less obvious to some. Writers are not immune to the Dunning-Kruger Effect. You can read the article, but in simple words it means people who are bad at things do not understand just how bad they are at the thing they are bad at. And I’m not wagging my fingers from the comfort of the other side of Ira Glass’s Gap. I’m still climbing the gap myself.

When I think back to my early twenties, I remember how absolutely certain I was about the craft of writing.  I did improve in those five years, and I did see some publishing successes, but there were far more rejections than acceptances. I played to my strengths in plotting, but I never went back to do any serious rewriting and my sentence structure often resulted in word salad.

It took sitting around a critique circle with twelve other writers on a really hot August day for almost seven hours to realize we all could figure out exactly wasn’t working in other people’s writing, but we weren’t showing what we all knew in our own. We could have handed our critiques to the person on our left, and any feedback would have been accurate.

I was a rule-breaker except “there are no rules” which I embraced whole-heartedly. I got off the Dunning-Kruger bump by really studying why a story failed, something that is almost impossible to do by reading published work that has most of the mistakes edited out. Around that time, a small group of SFWA  members wrote a sting manuscript to catch a vanity publishing house trying to pass off as legit by writing the worst book in the world. Watching good writers writing badly on purpose is worth the price of admission, but Teresa Nielsen Hayden didn’t torture similes, extend them into next week, or drape her chapter fifteen in purple. In her chapter, to paraphrase, the main character had supper, talked with his girlfriend for a while, watched a movie, and went home to bed. For Hayden, the worst possible writing wasn’t so-bad-it’s-good. Terrible writing was, and is, boring writing, in which nothing significant happens.

For those of us caught on the bump, getting down off it can take as little as realizing that no one is trying to fool you into believing that writing is any more complicated than it has to be. Show don’t tell works on all levels from the sentence structure to your statement on humanity. Cutting or editing anything that doesn’t belong keeps the writing tight, and keeping the conflict in the foreground as much as possible keeps the readers attention. The world doesn’t have to blow up; ending a marriage can be cosmically devastating to the right character.

Show don’t tell works on the page when you’re describing something, but it also works in the plot where you show the reader what’s important to the world, instead of stopping the action during an emotional scene to tell the reader what’s going on. It even works on the thematic level when you’re showing the reader what you have to say about the human condition.

Writers could spend years, if not decades, on the bump, doing the exact same thing over and over again and expecting different results. A friend of mine said she didn’t start selling short stories until she actually started reading short stories, even though she’d been told since the very beginning to read the magazine she wanted to sell to. I didn’t start selling until I realized rewriting is more important than the first draft. Deleting words used to feel like cutting off a limb. But if they are extraneous to the plot, it’s not even an outpatient procedure. It’s snipping off the threads on an itchy tag.

Writing needs both talent and skill, of which you’re born with a finite amount of one, and an infinite source of the other. If you are not where you want to be, but are actively working at improving yourself any way you possibly can, there’s absolutely nothing standing in your way. If you think marketing is the only difference between a best-seller and a trunk novel, then you are the thing standing in your way. Some people spend their whole life on the Dunning-Kruger bump. The view is great, but it gets them nowhere.

Barbara's Bio: Barbara didn’t learn that she had lived in three out of the four Northern Alberta towns that had a known or suspected Wendigo attack until well after she’d moved south to Lethbridge. She grew up loving ghost stories and pony books, and spent most of her summers on the British Columbia coast, where she fell in love with the ocean.

As Angela Fiddler, she has written The Master of the Lines series as well as Cy and his sex demon problem books. As Barbara Geiger, she has written The Tempest trilogy, starting with Coral Were His Bones, which exists in the same universe of the Middle Hill series, starting with Changeling, as well as various other novellas and short stories.

When she’s not blogging about the exploits of selkies, sex demons, and vampires, she writes about making bread at barbarageiger.me/blog.

You can contact Barbara (or Angela) by email at barbara_geiger@icloud.com.

LETTERS to the SLUSH PILE #21:

Dear -----, ------, and -------,

I wanted to write you as a group. Your stories are quite good, but there are a few niggling things you all do that I wanted to point out. These are small technical mistakes I also used to commit years ago before they were shown to me, so naturally, I'm very aware of them. In the examples that follow, the writing isn't as tightly written as it could be. Which begs the question - why are editors always harping on writing 'tight'? There are two basic reasons for this: one - space in a printed book or magazine is limited. This doesn't apply so much to digital work, but the rule still stands. Two: tight writing is work that has been distilled. It's stronger, more potent. It moves along faster, because there is nothing to block its flow.

I've taken the following examples from your work and have modified them slightly for anonymity's sake. You might think about rewriting these:

1). With his eyes, he made out the tiny figure climbing the hill. (Why point out 'with his eyes'? Isn't that obvious?)
2). Jack felt warmth spread throughout him. (This one isn't as bad as #1 above, but usually, there isn't any need to indicate someone feeling something. You could as well say, 'Warmth spread throughout him.'
3). There was a fireplace, for wood only. (What else would the fireplace be for? Spaghetti? If it isn't important, don't mention it.)

The next examples are about body language. Be careful with the images you present, especially if they can be taken literally.

1). She threw up her hands in frustration. (The visual here is throwing up or vomiting. I know what you mean, but the mind sometimes interprets such phrases before the logic sets in. Which means a snag in reading flow.)
2). John gave his head a shake. (By the same reasoning above, I imagined John removing his head and rattling it like a maraca. This tendency to visualize might come from reading a lot of science fiction and fantasy, but what can I say? The point is, you do not want me to break the reading flow with a ridiculous image. It would be better to say, 'John shook his head.')
3). Her presence challenged his man-pride. (Say whaaat? You absolutely do not want my mind to go there. Find a better way to describe his feelings of inadequacy, insecurity, or whatever.)

And finally, think about how you position dialogue. Sometimes, it's better to have one line of dialogue immediately followed by another, rather than to split the two lines with a short bit of internal reaction. Why? Because the prose moves faster. Here are two examples, almost identical in rendering. In my opinion, the second one works better:

"Don't deny it! I know you're behind Frederick's death. We found your dirk beside his closet!"

He had lost the knife, that much was true. But anyone could have set it in Frederick's chamber in order to accuse him. Most likely, it was Barnaby, who stood challenging him now, before all the court. He had drunk too much the night before and Madelaine had waylaid him. Had she taken it? With sick insight, he knew it was so.

"That proves nothing! Only that someone put it there!"

Or:

"Don't deny it! I know you're behind Frederick's death. We found your dirk beside his closet."

"That proves nothing! Only that someone put it there!"

 He had lost the knife, that much was true. But anyone could have set it in Frederick's chamber in order to accuse him. Most likely, it was Barnaby, who stood challenging him now, before all the court. He had drunk too much the night before, and Madelaine had waylaid him. Had she taken it? With sick insight, he knew it was so. 

 To wrap up, think about what can be taken literally in your prose, what is redundant, and how you might better position dialogue.Think about creating an ease of reading and smooth flow.

- Susan.

LETTERS to the SLUSH PILE #20

Dear --------,

You're got some great story-telling technique, but every now and then, you stop me right in my reading tracks. Please don't write like a girl.

I say this very tongue in 'chick', because I'm a girl (okay, a woman), too. You've got this great cyber story going on, with lots of action, and then you throw in a descriptive line like this: "Her hair was the colour of Chardonnay."

Now this might work if your story had some context to it concerning wine (as in wine punk - now there's a fresh idea), but on it's own, it reads like a romance-writer's cliché. There were other small faux-pas like this in your piece (as in describing a guy as 'a tall, broad-shouldered brunette' - brunette has a feminine cast to it - dark-haired would have been better.) These little mistakes aren't enough to make me reject your story (because they are easy to fix), but I just thought you should know. Maybe these wouldn't bother another editor, but they bugged me. Every word in your work needs to reflect your chosen genre, your tone, and a consistent style.

You're doing some good work. This picky little hint will make your stories even better.

All the best, Susan.

LETTERS to the SLUSH PILE #19

Dear --------

Thank you for submitting your story, ------- to On Spec. To be honest with you, I stopped reading after your first sentence so I might pen this post. I won't be buying your story. I know how much effort and care you have put into those 5900 words. I also know how a rejection might hurt because I sense you are a 'young' writer (in that you're just beginning to learn your craft). I hope you keep writing in spite of it. But somebody needs to tell you: if your first sentence isn't believable, if you don't take the time to 'sell' the reader on your story's premise, they are not going to appreciate the effort you take with the rest of it.

Ask yourself - if someone were to start telling you a story using your first sentence, would you be able to suspend your disbelief? You are asking me to believe in a world where our present-day technology has been severely limited with no explanation as to how it got that way. Further, you are asking me to believe that our intellects have eroded to such an extent that we are now little better than savannah-dwellers - yet we still maintain an understanding of a 'currency' - an inverse pun when you think about it - that money grows on trees. Sorry. I don't buy it.

I'll go back now and read the rest of your piece, because if you don't see this post, I will have this advice, and more, to give you.

Kudos on your courage, because being a writer takes all you have, and then some.

- Susan.

LETTERS TO THE SLUSH PILE #18

Dear -------

On Sunday, the other On Spec editors and I made our final picks of the stories that will appear in upcoming On Spec issues. You would think that after doing this for twenty-three years that I wouldn't be surprised by anything, but it appears that even after all of this time, I am. I'm speaking of editorial bias, and why we choose the stories we do.

I am always amazed when I think a story is awesome and others don't find it so. I just want you to know that I was stubborn enough to fight for the stories I loved, even if others didn't agree with me. To be fair, I also need to point out that my fellow editors also fought for what they thought was wonderful, even if I didn't share their opinion. Because On Spec is a collaborative effort, we will always pick our favorites, and especially so if one of us champions the work.

Editorial bias/personal taste - there's no way around it. My opinion of what I think is brilliant isn't always shared by others. When it comes to my own writing, as in, when I'm the one submitting and waiting for an editor's decision, it's the one thing that frustrates me most. We all like to think our writing is excellent. It would be great if everyone else thought so, too.

A while back, I did an ABC's post on rejection. If we rejected you, I just want you to know that it's very likely that your story came close. When you have four (or more) editors reading work, there will always be a lot of discussion. If there is a general consensus that a story was good but had a minor flaw, it may be that that flaw was what kept the story from making it into the magazine, as compared to a story that someone cares strongly about.

I'm sure I've mentioned it before, but we received over five hundred stories this submission window. Of those five hundred, we only bought eight. One other story is still under consideration. Part of the reason for this is we are waiting to hear how we will fare with our future grant funding. As well, we have already purchased stories from a prior submission's window. Only eight new stories out of five hundred should tell you that we had to be extremely selective this time around. With a very diverse editorial bias as part of our equation, if we rejected your work, I hope you'll realize that it doesn't necessarily reflect on your work's quality or value.

I have yet to contact those writers whose work we are accepting, and also to advise those we are rejecting. I will do that this coming week, as will my fellow editors regarding those pieces that fall under their jurisdiction. This will be my last Letter to the Slush Pile for a while, so I'll pen the sign-off I use on much of my writing correspondence. I mean the sentiment truly. It's been a pleasure. Thank you for sharing your work with me.

All the best to you in your future writing endeavours.

 - Susan.

LETTERS TO THE SLUSH PILE #17

WE ARE WRAPPING UP READING THE SECOND TIER SLUSH and will be meeting this coming Sunday to discuss which stories we want to buy for upcoming On Spec issues, as well as others we might consider under revision. I plan on posting the few remaining Letters to the Slush Pile that I've written, even after we've picked the stories we want to buy. I hope you've found these letters helpful, that they've given you some insight into what editors are looking for and how they think. Perhaps they've also helped you strengthen your own work.

Dear ------,

I can see you know what's required to craft a reasonable story - a decent plot, novel characters, good dramatic action that rises to a climax, and a final resolution. You even have a denouement. All of this shows me you have a basic understanding of what is needed in a complete story. What you haven't figured out yet, is how to take your story to the next level.

Your plucky protagonist does all the right things. She jumps in without waiting for others to handle the problem. She deals with it, narrowly escaping a terrible fate. You've written some great action, but in spite of what she's up against, I don't get the sense that she's really personally involved.

I can hear you thinking, "But she risks her life!" To which I would answer, "Yes, but because you don't set me inside her head enough, I don't know her thoughts, sense her fear, feel her terror at the idea of losing her husband or herself, or whatever else that's important." Like Wonder Woman, she jumps in to save the day, because that's what she does. Do you see what I'm getting at here? For your protagonist (and the reader), the story needs to be much more personal. There needs to be more at stake. She needs to have more to lose, and I need to worry that she just might lose it. If you share her interior world with me in much greater depth,  she will also be a much stronger character.

Rewrite the story with that in mind. If you do, I guarantee it will be better.

- Susan.

LETTERS TO THE SLUSH PILE #16

Dear -------,

What have you done to me?

You drew me in, right from the start with a very captivating opening hook. I liked your clean, direct style, your strong and believable characters, the honesty of a blooming relationship, all of that. As I read, I found myself dying to know what happens next (for me, this hardly ever happens). Your story just kept getting better and better until the last two pages, and then....

What the hell happened? I mean this literally. I have no idea. I re-read your ending twice, just to make sure I didn't miss your intent. But no, it wasn't a question of you being too subtle or me being obtuse.

I suspect we'll buy your story because up until the last second it's that good, but you've got to fill us in. I'm sure that once you clarify it for us, it'll be a great end to a great piece. In the meantime, I feel like I'm sitting in a Five Star French Restaurant, having tasted a fabulous appetizer, only to be told by the maitre d' that I need to come back tomorrow for the main course! Mon Dieu!

- Susan.

VOTER PACKAGE for THE CANADIAN SCIENCE FICTION and FANTASY AURORA AWARDS

SINCE ALL THE NOMINEES FOR THE 2014 AURORA AWARDS are creating Voter Packages for their work, I thought I should do one for Suzenyms. (Lorina Stephens, Publisher, Five Rivers Publishing is creating one for The Tattooed Witch, also nominated for an Aurora.) What follows is a synopsis of the majority of topics I've covered on Suzenyms since its resurrection. For aspiring writers, there is The ABC's of How 'Not' to Write Speculative Fiction stream, which I am half-way through and which I'll continue to post until it's done. The Letters to the Slush Pile stream is for more experienced writers who want to know what's going through an editor's head as she reads their work. The third stream is composed of Guest Interviews, where I feature professionals who share their writing, editing, and promotional expertise, and the fourth features my writing journey with The Tattooed Witch and subsequent books in the trilogy. I've also included a number of topics under Miscellaneous. Click on any of the links, and they should take you to the desired topic:

From The ABC's of How 'Not' to Write Speculative Fiction:

• A is for: Action, Anachronisms, Adverbs and Other Unnecessary Words
• B is for: Believability
• C is for: Climaxes, Conclusions, and Denouements, Cliches, Characterization (Part One), Characterization (Part Two), Characterization (Part Three)
• D is for: Dramatic Tension, Dialogue
• E is for: Eyes, Arms, Legs and Other Bodily Appendages, Exposition
• F is for: Formatting, Feedback
• G is for: Grammar
• H is for: Historical Fantasy, Horror, and Humour - Links to Guest Interviews  
• I is for:  Idea vs. Story, Italics 
• K is for: Kangaroos and Other Beasties  
• L is for: Logic Faults 
• M is for: Metaphors, Mixed and Otherwise, Mood
• N is for: Novel Chapters Disguised as Short Stories  
• O is for: Obscenity/Profanity
• P is for: Point of View and Point of View Shifts, Purple Prose  
• Q is for Query Letters
• R is for: Rejection
• S is for SF Enough?, Soapbox  
• T is for Titles
• U is for Using Real People as Characters and Issues of Copyright  
• V is for Vagueness, Voice - Active and Passive
• W is for Why?
• X to Z - forthcoming.

From Letters (and Memos) to the Slush Pile:

• # 1  - Welcome to Letters to the Slush Pile
• # 2  - Reaching Too Soon for Dramatic Effect
• # 3  - Writing Responsibly
• # 4  - A Fun Read
• # 5  - A Copy-Editor's Nightmare
• # 6  - Humans in Alien/Animal/Shape-Shifter Suits
• # 7  - When Too Much is Too Much
• # 8  - Missing the Basics
• # 9  - Great Opening and Then It Wandered Off....
• #10 - Show Me More
• #11 - Sex Sells but This Didn't
• #12 - Kudos for Bringing Me to Tears
• #13 - Depth of Emotion
• #14 - Nothing in Excess
• #15 - Losing Suspension of Disbelief
• #16 - Great Appetizer, Where's the Main Course?
• #17 - The Interior World of Your Characters
• #18 - Editorial Bias 
• Memos to the Slush Pile: # 1 - Ò, Ó, or Õ, #2 - Your Bio...

Guest Interviews:

• A Closer Look at On Spec Editors - Ann Marston
• A Closer Look at On Spec Editors - Barb Galler-Smith
• A Closer Look at On Spec Editors - Barry Hammond
• A Closer Look at On Spec Editors - Diane Walton
• A Closer Look at On Spec Editors - Robin Carson
• A Closer Look at On Spec Editors - Susan MacGregor
• A Closer Look at On Spec Editors - Eileen Bell
• A Closer Look at On Spec Editors - Constantine Kaoukakis
• A Closer Look at On Spec Editors - Brent Jans
• A Closer Look at On Spec Editors - Laurie Penner
• Book Collaborations - Guest Interview with Billie Milholland, Eileen Bell, and Ryan McFadden of The Puzzle Box
• Book Promotion Idea - Hal Friesen's Character Deathmatch
• Bundoran Press - Guest Post by Hayden Trenholm
• Dropping the 'F' Bomb, Michael Fletcher, 88, Five Rivers Publishing
• 88 Interview, Michael Fletcher, Five Rivers Publishing
• Five Rivers Publishing Interview, Lorina Stephens, Publisher
• Food for the Gods, Karen Dudley Interview
• Guerrilla Marketing - Promoting Your Book, Billie Milholland, Women of the Apocalypse
• Indigo Time Interview, Sally McBride, Five Rivers Publishing
• Mik Murdoch, Boy Superhero Interview, Michell Plested, Five Rivers Publishing 
• New Comic Series at On Spec, The Last Division and Final Frontier Interview, Cat McDonald, On Spec Magazine
• New Editors at On Spec Magazine 
• On the Nature of Humour and Speculative Fiction, Hugh A.D. Spencer, Extreme Dentistry's
• On Spec's Interview with Tyche Books on the Silver Anniversary Anthology
• Out of Time Interview, Dave Laderoute, Five Rivers Publishing
• Publicists, Part One - Do I Need a Publicist, and If So, What Kind? Rachel Sentes, Publicist, Gal-Friday Publicity
• Publicists, Part Two - Can a Writer Work With Two Publicists at the Same Time? Rachel Sentes, Publicist, Gal-Friday Publicity
• Publicists, Part Three - What Can a Publicist Do For Me, and How Much Will It Cost? Rachel Sentes, Publicist, Gal-Friday Publicity
• Quick Tricks for That Final Edit, Eileen Bell, Seeing the Light (forthcoming)
• Report on Geek Girl Con, Diane Walton, Managing Editor, On Spec Magazine
• The Challenges of Writing Young Adult, Dave Laderoute, Out of Time
• The 'F' Word, On Spec Editors
• Those First Three Chapters, What Are Publishers Looking For? Robert Runte, Editor, Five Rivers Publishing
• Urban Green Man Interview, co-editors Adria Laycraft and Janice Blaine, EDGE Books
• What and What Not to Do at Conventions, Peter Halasz, Administrator, Sunburst Award Society
• Writing Coaches, Do I Need One? Rachel Sentes, Publicist, Gal-Friday Publicity
• Writing Historical Fantasy, Barb Galler-Smith, Druids Trilogy
• Writing Horror: Teaching Little Monsters, Derek Newman-Stille, Speculating Canada
• Youtube Clip - Lorina Stephens interviews Dave Laderoute and Susan Forest, Five Rivers Authors about their Aurora nominations

The Tattooed Witch and Trilogy:

• Broke 40,000 Words on The Tattooed Rose
• Golem Magic
• Hybrid Books, Are They Saleable?
• I'm on YouTube 
• Joaquin Cortes in True Life, Joachin de Rivera in The Tattooed Witch (YouTube clip) 
• Magical Systems, The Tattooed Witch
• Romancing the Crone
• Romancing the Crone, Part Two
• Some Fun Research - Herbals in The Tattooed Witch
• Seven Spotlight Questions - My Writing Life
• The Tattooed Witch, The First Two Chapters
• Rafael Sabatini, Where Have You Been All My Life? 
• Considerations When Writing a Trilogy and Update on The Tattooed Seer
• Back Jacket for The Tattooed Seer 
• Youtube Clip - Lorina Stephens interviews Susan MacGregor about her Best Novel Aurora nomination for The Tattooed Witch
• Cover for The Tattooed Seer 
• The Tattooed Seer is up on Amazon, Kobo, etc.! 
• Launching Five Rivers Books at When Words Collide 
• Synchronicities, Coincidences, and Some Fun Research for The Tattooed Rose 

Miscellaneous

•  Are Writers Different? Why I Think They Are....
• Can Self Published Work be Re-Submitted to Magazines and Anthologies?
• Commonality of Writing Experience, Tina Fey's Bossypants
• Inferno by Dan Brown, Now That I Got Around to Reading It
• Inspiration in the Form of a Nine-Year Old
• Istanbul... 
• On Spec's New Submission Process
• Questioning What is Worth It
• Small Presses, Large Houses, and Right of First Refusal
• Why Didn't On Spec Buy My Story? 
• Writing to Evoke, Engage, and Entertain
• Writing as a Violent Act - Repost of On Spec Editorial
• On Spec's Submission Process - A Walk-Through with Diane Walton 
• Rafael Sabatini, Where Have You Been All My Life? 
• Visiting Green Gables and Getting to Know Lucy Maud a Little Better 
• Call for Submissions - On Spec's Punk Theme Issue
• An Addendum to the Guidelines for On Spec's Punk Theme Issue - SF Enough?
• What Brings You Joy? If You Are a True Artist, You Already Know the Answer to That  
• Was it Piracy or Something Else? 
• 50,000 Page Views!
• On Spec's Canada Council Funding Has Been Cut 
• How You Can Help in Light of Canada Council's Funding Cut to On Spec Magazine

LETTERS TO THE SLUSH PILE #15

Dear -------

I can see why one of the editors at On Spec chose your story to put forward for the rest of us to read in the second pass at the slush. Your prose is quite lovely throughout. There are sentences, even paragraphs, I read a second time, just to enjoy them. You have a wonderful style, soft, flowing, set in watercolor pastels, which perfectly fits the story of the fisherman, the sea, and the selkie, you are telling. You cast a fine net, but there were holes.

The first one was when the fisherman rescues the selkie/woman. He's mystified to find her in his net, alive, but naked and dazed. He believes he has rescued a real woman from a nearby ship. When he finds her coat shortly thereafter, caught on the underside of his boat, he doesn't realize what it really is, but he decides to bury it under the floorboards of his house, anyway.

That stopped me reading, right there. I was willing to believe, as your protagonist does, that your selkie was a half-drowned woman. I wasn't willing to believe that as soon as he found her coat, that the idea of selkie wouldn't cross his mind immediately. He's a fisherman. He would know all about the superstitions of selkies and the sea. Furthermore, when you try to rationalize why he buries the coat under his floorboards (maybe he can sell it), I don't believe it. He isn't fooling anyone. No, at this point, he knows she's a selkie, and he wants to keep her for his wife.

I see your quandary. You were hoping to maintain reader sympathy for your protagonist - he's a nice but lonely man, but that becomes difficult when he pulls something sneaky. The problem becomes that my suspension of disbelief is lost. As a reader, I'm focusing more on why something doesn't work in your story, rather than the story, itself.

When I finished reading the piece, I wondered if you couldn't rework it with the following in mind:

1). As a narrator, don't try to fool the reader. Admit that your protagonist isn't perfect, that he is culpable and knows it, right from the beginning. We can all relate to a flawed protagonist. We all understand neediness and loneliness. This will make him a much more complex character.

2). Do something really original with your story. When writers revisit old tales involving mythical creatures like selkies, dragons, unicorns, or what have you, they need to step away from what's already been done. You've re-told me the classic selkie story. You may have attempted making it more original with your selkie leaving a pearl for the fisherman at the end, but this isn't enough. Develop this idea - that your selkie, although a seal, has also loved the fisherman. The more depth of emotion you show, the more the reader will feel it.

3). You never explain why the selkie loses her coat, and maybe this isn't important, but it bears thinking about. At the moment, it seems rather convenient to your story that she loses it. If it is so easily lost, the whole thing coming off, why aren't there more selkies roaming about?

I don't know how the discussion about your story will go at Fight Night. Others may not agree that these points have merit, but I suspect they will. With the lovely style you've already shown us, this story can only improve with a rewrite.

- Susan.

LETTERS TO THE SLUSH PILE #14

Dear --------,

I know your story is going to generate a lot of discussion at Fight Night. Fight Night is our term for when we On Spec editors get together to fight for (or against) various stories that we want to include in the magazine.

When I was in University, one of the most valuable things I learned about writing was that everything should be there for a reason. That old Greek adage about moderation, found in the temple of Apollo at Delphi would apply - Meden Agan (μηδὲν ἄγαν)`, or 'Nothing in excess'. I embrace that school of thought.

That said, there are always exceptions to the rule - even when those rules are one's own. You penned a great piece. Your young protagonist is one of the most well developed characters I have ever come across in a short story - this is excellent YA. However, you've also included a number of elements in your story that, although intriguing, remain unexplained. As a reader, I prefer everything tied up, everything there for a reason, everything revealed by the end. I feel I should know why things are presented the way they are.

Luckily for you, not everyone on our editorial team agrees with me.

As I said, it's going to be an interesting Fight Night when we talk about your story. I suspect if one of us champions your work with strong convictions, I'll allow myself to be swayed.

- Susan.

LETTERS TO THE SLUSH PILE #13

WE ARE INTO OUR SECOND PASS in reading the slush. The stories we are looking at now have been culled from the 500+ that we received during our last submissions window. If you haven't received a rejection letter from us at On Spec, then congratulations. Your story has been chosen for further consideration. I'm going to continue writing my Letters to the Slush Pile so I might shed a bit more light on what I'm thinking about these second-tier stories. Whether we buy the story or not is still up for discussion.

Dear ------,
Thank you for submitting ------ to us. All of us at On Spec like hard SF and we don't get a lot of it. (That said, we also love fantasy, but we do get more of that.) You've handled the action and setting in your story really well, showing me what the protocol would be if such a disaster were to occur. I want to talk about what I think your story still needs.

Your protagonist displays all the right physical reactions in dealing with an emergency - he attempts communication with the crew, etc. However, even though he does everything he possibly could, he doesn't react strongly enough. You've told me things to indicate what he is feeling like, "he desperately hoped the computer was malfunctioning..." (hope) or "he closed his eyes," (grief), or "an overwhelming sense of deja-vu gripped him," (confusion/fear/inevitability). In all of these examples, you've told me about your protagonist's emotions through exposition or body language, but you haven't told me enough. You're keeping the reader at an emotional distance.

I want to feel what your protagonist is feeling. Body language is a good start, but if you were to add the visceral reactions of grief, fear, hopelessness, etc., your writing would be much more vivid and engaging. Describe for me, the physical reactions of fear. Tear me apart with grief (the aching chest, the inability to breathe, the closing throat, the sense of panic that comes from losing control, that kind of thing). Readers live vicariously through a character's experience—within the safety of their armchairs. Give them a strong experience, something more they can relate to.

I also want to say something about the choices you've made about what emotions you present and how. Ironically, this has to do with logic. If your protagonist is the only survivor remaining after the ship has been destroyed, I think he would grieve his lost crew more than he does, or grieve his impending death, instead of focusing on the beauty of the planet as he hangs in space. Perhaps you meant to indicate he's in a state of shock, or this is his way of having faith—believing in something bigger than himself—but if so, again, that isn't as gripping a story. Readers are held by a strong emotional experience which generates reader sympathy. This reader sympathy can then can be directed to the other aspects of your story which I think you find important, ie., themes touching upon death, alternate lives, and the life hereafter.

- Susan.

LETTERS TO THE SLUSH PILE #12

Dear ------

What is that old saying? The best is saved for last? I've been wrapping up my first pass at the slush pile. When I originally tried to read your story, for some reason Submittable prevented me from opening it. Today, as I was wrapping up those few stories that I have remaining, I was finally able to read yours.

In my Letters to the Slush Pile #4, I raved about a terrific story that delighted me because it was so funny - it made me laugh out loud. Your work entertained me in a different way. It brought me to tears.

Not only have you told me a story with great style and grace, but your protagonist filled me with profound respect. I've suggested in previous posts that if a character dies, it should mean something - that that character's life, and his death, should touch us. For me, you did that.

When a writer reminds us of what is truly important in life, when she reflects on those subtle and beautiful moments that are so easy to dismiss because of our preoccupation with the pressing and the mundane, that writer does us a service. Your story was the best piece in the over one hundred submissions that were my responsibility to read. Of course, I am putting it forward.

My fellow editors may as well love it as much as I have.

- Susan.

LETTERS TO THE SLUSH PILE #11

Dear -----

I'm only a couple of pages into your story. I've stopped reading to write this post. Just so you know, On Spec is a speculative fiction magazine.

I know sex sells, but you're far better off starting us off with a hint of science fiction or magical fantasy, not some sex scene that makes me groan (in the wrong way) and talks about 'strokes' and 'blossoming womanhood'. Are you referring to orgasm when you talk of 'blossoming womanhood'? To me, this is 'fluffy sex' prose. Don't romanticize. Write it like it is.

Also, eyes can't 'embrace'. Even when they're emerald green. You might want to check an earlier ABC's I posted, on E is for Eyes, Arms, Legs, and Other Bodily Appendages.

Okay, after penning the above rant, I returned to your story to give it a fair read. I see that you do have an SF element to it. Still, (and for an SF market) you might start with an opening that establishes your story as SF and not romance or erotica.

You also need to think through some of your logic. Since most governments in the democratic world include officials who are 50 and over, I find it highly unlikely that anyone over 50 would be relegated to government compounds. Furthermore, you need to be careful when you target a particular ethnic group  as terrorists in need of mind alteration. There's a word for that. It starts with 'R'.

- Susan.

LETTERS TO THE SLUSH PILE #10

Dear ------

There was a lot about your story I liked. First off, your main character's ability to slip in and out of earthly reality intrigued me. I love this kind of story, whether it's because a character can shape-shift, he's been granted this ability by the gods, or whatever. For me, a premise like this lends to so many possibilities. I admit, I am biased. Every editor likes certain things, and this is one of my favorite themes. You also put enough of a spin on it to make it original.

I just wish you'd shown me more. You touched upon this slipping between realities enough to whet my appetite, but I wanted to understand this process and your protagonist's world and his position in it, better. I had too many questions. How did your main character come to be a guardian? Why do the invaders consider him unclean? Who are these invaders, and what is it that they specifically want?

The second issue I had with the story is one I've had a number of debates over - your protagonist dies a victim. Most victim stories don't go far enough. If your protagonist is going to die, I need to have a sense that he still learns something, that he 'earns' a small victory, even in the face of  his own death. I need a greater emotional pay-off. Feeling sad that a character is killed isn't enough. The news is filled with such sad stories every day. What lifts us from our 'oh, that's too bad' complacency is a connection. That connection comes from building a strong character with whom we can relate, and that we know his death was not in vain.

All the best to you. If you choose to tackle a revision, I'd be happy to look at it the next time our submission window opens.

- Susan.

LETTERS TO THE SLUSH PILE #9

Dear -------

Wow! Your story started off so well! I love your main character, the depth of her emotions, the glimpse you gave me into her mind, the connection I felt with her in what could only be a difficult situation. As I read your story, I wasn't sure it would be SF-enough for On Spec, but I hung in there to find out.

A great opening, an excellent introduction. And then... it kind of wandered off. It's as if you left out an important middle bit and jumped to the end, leaving me wondering too much. I know shit happened, but you've held the details so close to your chest, that I'm not exactly sure what.

I'd like to see you develop this story further. I won't buy it as it is, but you've intrigued me enough. I'd like your protagonist to be more conflicted, more motivated. I'd like to see the story reach a solid climax before the end. Don't let your end be a final reveal, with an 'it's all so awful' conclusion. Instead, show me some character growth. You're a good writer. You can give me so much more.

If you care to work on a revision, I'd be happy to look at it.

All the best - Susan.

LETTERS TO THE SLUSH PILE #8

Dear ---------,

Thank you for submitting your story -------- to On Spec for our consideration. What can I say? It's certainly one of the most original pieces I have ever read. Unfortunately, this kind of originality isn't something we would normally buy.

I suppose you can take creatures A, B, C, and D, and give them an unusual reason for being together. And I suppose you can introduce yet another type of being from an entirely different sub-genre as a helper who is there to fix things when they go wrong. But you won't tell me a solid story, if you do. What you've given me is an idea with little in the way of plot. There is no drama, no challenges for your main character to meet (other than to fix things, which he does), the story offers no climax - none of that. Without a solid underpinning to your piece in terms of the world you present, or a logical framework (the premise you've given me is convenient, but it doesn't make a lot of sense) your story reads like something out of a strange dream.

Bottom line? You'll be further ahead if you go back to practicing story basics, or learning what they are, if you don't already know.

I wish you all the best with that. 

- Susan.

LETTERS TO THE SLUSH PILE #7

Dear ------,

Thank you for submitting your story ------ to On Spec for consideration. You know how to write, you have the technique down pat, but you're missing some story basics.

Let me paint you a picture, so you can get an idea of how your story struck me. Imagine you've been invited to your best friend's family reunion. Her family is quirky; every relative is a Star Trek aficionado (but you've never been a fan). Everyone is also in costume, and they aren't going by their real names. You're introduced to each relative in quick succession and are expected to remember what part of the galaxy they're from. They all blend into an interesting whole, but as time goes on, it's hard to keep them straight. Things become confusing. Maybe someone's spiked the punch bowl.

Half way through the reunion - Saturday night (the party started Friday afternoon), James T. Kirk shows up - handsome, clever, and sexy. There's a fight (as there often is at family reunions), but James T. intervenes, and it all turns out fine in the end. An interesting weekend, if a little nutty, but nobody gets hurt.

So... how does this apply to your piece? My Star Trek metaphor aside, I think your main problem is you're trying to put too much into a short story. You're dealing with an ambitious theme - a government take-over - which might work better for a novel, especially considering the cast of characters you've introduced.

You need to present your protagonist on page one - at the beginning. As it is, the first half of your story is set-up -  that's far too long.You may think you're introducing characters, but you're actually creating a milieu. Give your protagonist some serious trouble and a strong motivation to deal with it from the get-go. If he has a personal stake, as well as a professional one, so much the better. Create some real conflict (your story has next to none). Finally, and on a minor note, whenever you're dealing with aliens with strange names in a short story, please limit their number, or your reader will wind up getting lost. I had to keep going back and forth to keep them all straight.

You have ability. (For example, you handle dialogue quite well. Your characters are also interesting.) You just need to reign your story in.

- Susan.