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. 

 

 

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.

REFLECTIONS ON VOICE

AS A FIVE RIVERS AUTHOR, I have access to all Five Rivers titles which include some of the best science fiction and fantasy Canadians put out there. It's one of the perks I enjoy for being part of the Five Rivers family. Recently, I finally figured out how to transfer all of this great work onto my Kindle. I've been catching up on my reading ever since.

You would think that having been an editor  for over twenty years with On Spec Magazine, I'd appreciate all the different voices On Spec has showcased over the years. I do, but short fiction only gives you a sampling of that unique way each writer handles their prose - what we call Voice. Reading novels in quick succession really brings Voice home to me - especially if I know the writer personally. It's amazing to read beyond plot, beyond character, and to realize how characters approach situations, and how the story is paced, really does reflect the writer.

Okay, pretty obvious on the surface, but I'm talking about subtleties here. For example, one of my writer friends approaches conflict in a certain way. She thinks a lot about the issue before she acts, she moralizes, she tends to talk a good argument, she plans, and, in the end, she side-steps or defuses the conflict whenever possible. She also handles conflict in her fiction in exactly this way. Where some may throw themselves into the fictional fray with swords swinging, guns blazing, karate chops chopping (because they tend to be a bit more volatile in life), she doesn't. I'm not saying either way is good or bad - there is room for both. Readers enjoy different things. Only that how she acts and thinks reflects how she writes, which mirrors her Voice.

I mentioned in an earlier post that my book The Tattooed Witch was included in an Aurora Awards StoryBundle curated by Douglas Smith. As part of the promotion, those of us who were involved, promoted the Bundle on our blogs, on Twitter, and elsewhere. Hayden Trenholm, publisher of Bundoran Press, wrote this about me: "I've known Susan MacGregor for enough years that I can't quite remember...in any case, we met from time to time at conventions in Western Canada, both when I lived in Calgary and later...where we would have brief but intense conversations..."

Brief but intense conversations. I had to smile at that. Because that is me. It also reflects how I handle my prose, how I write, my style of Voice.

As I read, I sometimes find how others handle a scene is not how I would, either pace-wise, or character-wise, or what have you. We all have our different styles. But I also began to wonder how an editor of novels respects the work without insisting an author's voice adhere to their preconceived notions of what is right (or better). So I asked an expert, my own editor and publisher at Five Rivers, Lorina Stephens. Lorina writes:

"How do I manage to edit all these different voices and honour them? Respect the artist’s work. Don’t put your hand to it. Suggest. Guide. Nurture. It’s difficult sometimes because I know how I’d handle a story or scene. But that doesn’t necessarily make it the right way. As an editor I think you have to walk out of yourself and learn to view artistic expression with a broad view, to understand, to learn.

I've learned a lot personally from voices like Thomas King, Joseph Boyden, Richard Wagamese, Salman Rushdie, Rohinton Mistry. Particularly Rushdie. I am always blown away by his writing, how he gets away with breaking every rule and does so brilliantly. How he chooses words and structure carefully and with precision to suit the action, mood, and voice of the work or scene. Simply brilliant. But not easy to read. By no means. He makes no apology whatever for his work. I believe he simply writes for himself, and if anyone else enjoys or gets what he's doing, well great. But otherwise, as Sting has said, "I'll write for the cat."

Well said, Lorina. I'll finish with two quotes by Steven King. The first, because many writers, when they're starting to write, get caught up in what might be popular: "First, write for yourself, and then worry about the audience." The second has to do with Voice: "Stick to your own style. One cannot imitate a writer's approach to a particular genre, no matter how simple what that writer is doing may seem."

So, we all have a Voice, even if we don't think we do. It's just a matter of being yourself and putting down those words.

- 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.

Karşilama! Accueil! Willkommen! Ласкаво просимо! Bine ai venit! and Benvenuto!

Karşilama! Accueil! Willkommen! Ласкаво просимо! Bine ai venit! and Benvenuto!

I wanted to look up all of these ways of saying 'welcome' in Turkish, French, German, Ukrainian, Romanian, and Italian. Why? Because after checking the statistics for Suzenyms for some time, these are the countries (other than the US and Canada) that visit the blog most often. So welcome, and thank you!

To tell you the truth, I'm a little surprised by all the attention the blog seems to be getting from you people in Turkey. At first, I wondered if it had something to do with my trip last April to Istanbul. (I love, love, love your city!) My thoughts spiraled off into all sorts of strange directions, including wondering if I were being followed by the Turkish authorities, but no, I think maybe you just like what I am doing here, so ‘karşilama’ and ‘teşekkür ederim’ to you! This week, Turkish followers outweighed even those from the US and my own home country of Canada, by a whopping 50%. It is surprising, but I feel a connection. Thank you, Turkey.

Looking across the Black Sea, attention from Ukraine has also been unexpected. Is it because I may be related to Ivan Franko (on my mother's side), the Ukrainian poet, writer, social and literary critic, or do all of you just like my ABC's? I must tell you, I have been very concerned about what is going on your country. I sympathize more than you know. I think of you often, and I wish you peace.

I also appreciate the number of views I've been getting from France, Germany, Romania, Great Britain, Italy, and elsewhere in Europe, as well as from China, Japan, and Australia. Over the past month, the posts receiving the most attention have been about On Spec's lack of continued funding from the Canada Council, the magazine's call for submissions (we are currently open now to October 31st for both the Punk theme and regular issues. Please note: we have a new website - this link will take you there), several of my essays on writing, my book reviews for both The Tattooed Witch and The Tattooed Seer, and of course, the ABC's. 

I will continue to provide what I hope you will find interesting. No matter where you live across the globe, thanks for your support. If you have purchased a copy of The Tattooed Witch or The Tattooed Seer, thank you doubly for that. My success is because of you, your endorsements of this blog, and my books. Thank you.

- Susan.

A CLOSER LOOK AT ON SPEC EDITOR, BRENT JANS

On Spec Cover by Dan O'Driscoll

AS I DID WITH EILEEN BELL AND CONSTANTINE KAOUKAKIS, I put the following questions to new editor, Brent Jans. 

1). What kinds of stories appeal to you most? Do you lean towards a particular type of story or style? I’m a big fan of Urban Fantasy, so I love stories set in our world (or even a future world) with a fantastic or mythological aspect. For me, those types of stories harken back to early fairy-tales in that they have the potential to teach us about ourselves and our world by contrasting it with the fantastic. Moonheart, by Charles de Lint, was my earliest exposure to the genre. It has continued to set the bar for what I consider to be good writing, not just in Urban Fantasy but for speculative fiction in general.

In more general terms, I tend to like stories with strong characters - not necessarily characters I like, but characters that make their presence known. I love well-written first person narrative; when it's done right it can be like listening to a friend tell you a story. I also tend to like stories that sound good when read out loud. I will sometimes read books or stories to people. I can always tell when a writer didn’t read their work aloud before submitting it.

2). What types of stories don't appeal to you? What are your pet peeves, writing-wise? Characters that go nowhere. If your protagonist is the same at the end as he/she/it was at the start, then you didn’t tell a story. There seems to be a trend towards focusing on mood, detail, and setting these days. Nothing wrong with that, as long as you remember to tell me a story while you’re at it. If you don’t have a protagonist, or if your protagonist is just a mannequin upon which to hang your fantastically moody setting, then you don’t have a story. At best, you have a compelling writing exercise which I’ll be happy to read if/when you turn it into a story.

3). What advice would you give to a writer submitting to us? Follow the submission guidelines. If I’m staring at a list-filled screen of submissions I have to get through, I am looking for any excuse to lighten my workload. If you didn’t follow our guidelines (over word count, didn’t follow formatting instructions, and so on) you’ve given me that excuse. At this point you might think, “What a lazy jerk!” but how well you follow the submission guidelines gives me a glimpse of how you’ll be to work with as we go through the editing process. Don’t disqualify yourself. If any of the guidelines don’t make sense to you, please contact us. We want your stories, so we’re happy to answer questions.

4). Please list any credits you'd like mentioned (ie. book pubs, editing/publishing involvement), followed by a small bio: Brent Jans is the most junior of editors for On Spec Magazine and a lifelong, unapologetic sci-fi and fantasy geek. He’s that guy you know who re-reads The Lord of the Rings every year, yes, including The Silmarillion. When not copy-editing, proofing, maintaining the website, or dipping his toe into the slush pile for On Spec, he freelances as an editor for independent game publishers (such as Mystic Ages Publishing’s Foreign Element RPG), as well as Wayfinder, a long-running fan publication for the Pathfinder RPG. Brent is a devout gamer, keeping the faith for over thirty years by playing more tabletop games than you might think possible.

Thanks, Brent. It's great to have you as part of our team. For those of you who have been reading these posts, you can see we are a very diverse bunch at On Spec, which is a good thing for both readers and writers. If you haven't checked the rest of us out already, the links below are an indication of what we personally like and don't like to see in the slush:

For Diane Walton

For Barb Galler-Smith  

For Ann Marston  

For Eileen Bell 

For Constantine Kaoukakis 

For Barry Hammond (poetry) 

and for myself, Susan MacGregor.)

A CLOSER LOOK AT ON SPEC EDITOR, CONSTANTINE KAOUKAKIS

THE FOLLOWING GUEST POST IS BY CONSTANTINE KAOUKAKIS WHO RECENTLY JOINED our On Spec team as an editor. As with Eileen Bell, I asked him:

1). What kinds of stories appeal to you most? Do you lean towards a particular type of story or style? Original and thought-provoking stories appeal to me. Fascinating and complex characters enhance and make the story.

2). What types of stories don't appeal to you? What are your pet peeves, writing-wise? I loathe clichés and overused plots. Sometimes, authors try too hard to impress, and that backfires. I believe the craftsmanship of the writing is equally important to the plot. I have read stories with intriguing plots but poor writing. In the end, it defeats the goal of the writer. I abhor sexist, racist, ageist, and homophobic stories. I am not a fan of stream-of-consciousness stories.

3). What advice would you give to a writer submitting to us? Proofread, proofread, and proofread!  Don’t be afraid to alter the story in order to improve it. I find some writers tend to resist editing. Writing is like painting. One has to try different colours, hues, and combinations to create a story. Writing is a process, a discovery, and an evolution. The writer should research properly and have the correct information when writing about science-related stories. I realize it's science fiction, but it has to be believable. Readers today are very sophisticated. If an author insults their intelligence, they will never forgive him or her for it.

4). Please list any credits you'd like mentioned (i.e. book pubs, editing/publishing involvement), followed by a small bio: I am thrilled and honoured to be a new editor of On Spec magazine. I have degrees in Education, English, and Classics which have enabled me to teach Latin, ancient and modern Greek, ESL, English literature, ancient Greek and Roman literature at the high school, college, and university levels: Concordia University (Montreal), Queen’s University, and minor colleges. I have founded The Wisteria Lodgers – the Sherlock Holmes Society of Edmonton. My interests include comic books (Marvel & DC), Sherlock Holmes, Star Trek, Harry Potter, Lord of the Rings, Greek mythology, Doctor Who, British murder mysteries, ancient history, and literature. I am currently writing a murder mystery.

Thanks, Constantine. It's great to have you on board. For those of you who want to see what the rest of us like and don't like, check out these previous posts:

For Diane Walton
For Barb Galler-Smith
For Ann Marston
For Eileen Bell
For Barry Hammond (poetry)
and for myself, Susan MacGregor.)

HOW YOU CAN HELP, IN LIGHT OF ON SPEC'S CANADA COUNCIL FUNDING CUT

THE FOLLOWING POST WAS WRITTEN BY DIANE WALTON, Managing Editor of On Spec Magazine, and Jen Laface, Publisher's Assistant, but it represents all of us on the On Spec team in regards to our thoughts about the Canada Council's decision to cut On Spec's grant funding. If you feel moved to help the magazine, if you wish to support speculative fiction in Canada, you might consider the following suggestions.

TO ALL OF OUR FRIENDS, READERS, AND FOLLOWERS, thank you for your moral and financial support. We really appreciate it.

We’ve asked our supporters and ourselves, “what should we do?” There are many avenues available for continuing to publish great speculative fiction stories. One idea suggested to us at Calgary’s When Words Collide convention, was for us to ask our supporters to send letters to their MPs advising them of Canada Council’s cut to On Spec’s funding.

If you wish to let your feelings about the funding cuts to On Spec  be known to public officials as well as to the Canada Council, below you will find a list of names and addresses. Remember to cc your letter to your local Member of Parliament.

We aren't providing a form letter, because those tend to get ignored by the intended audience. Instead, look below for some salient points to our argument. Feel free to put them in your own words and use for your letters.

Here’s a guide to the points below:

• Reasons why the Minister of Canadian Heritage should know about On Spec’s loss of the Canada Council grant.
• Points related to how On Spec contributes to Canadian culture and values, and the economy.
• Concerns about the recent cut in Canada Council funding to On Spec.
• What On Spec is doing to deal with the cut in funding.
• Who to contact with addresses below.

How can telling the Minister of Canadian Heritage about the loss of the Canada Council grant help On Spec?

The Honourable Shelly Glover will be aware of On Spec’s importance to Canadian culture, as offering a distinct voice in a genre of fiction. As the Minister of Canadian Heritage, she sets directives and policy on the promotion of Canadian culture, including funding.

What points to communicate regarding On Spec’s contribution to Canadian culture and economy:

• On Spec Magazine is a multiple Aurora award-winning publication, and the Aurora is Canada’s main prize for excellence in  the genre of science fiction and fantasy.
• The Copper Pig Writers’ Society, a non-profit organization, has printed On Spec for over 25 years, showcasing Canadian talent in science fiction, fantasy, and other speculative fiction. The magazine publishes short stories and poetry, including non-fiction.
• On Spec recognizes the importance of well-written genre fiction for the Canadian economy. Genre fiction is popular as a commercial genre as well as a literary genre, which is observed with the current popularity of science fiction and fantasy movies, books, games, and other forms of entertainment. The commercial genre produces writers employed in different industries (video game development, television and movie screenplays, novels).
• On Spec provides writers of genre fiction a starting place to be recognized. Genre writers in the commercial field in Canada generate taxable revenue and require a significantly smaller investment than many other industries, leading to a higher return on investment and additionally the promotion of an industry that is environmentally friendly. In the case of On Spec, that investment is $20,000. It is important to note that most of these writers support themselves through other taxable employment in addition to developing their skills.
• On Spec celebrates Canadian values. We’ve published stories and artwork by Canadians from diverse backgrounds, including minorities, First Nations, women, LGBT, youths, and more. The magazine was started in 1989 in response to several Canadian speculative fiction authors receiving rejection letters from American publishers, which stated the stories were “well-written” but had a “different voice” that was too distinct for their markets.
• On Spec has printed established and emerging Canadian writers recognized in Canada and beyond, including award-winning novelist Robert J. Sawyer, co-founder of PopCap Games Jason Kapalka, and novelists Peter Watts, Charles de Lint, Leah Bobet, Cory Doctorow, and many more authors. For many of On Spec’s writers, their first publications were in On Spec Magazine. On Spec provided a place for their voices to be heard in publishing, and several have gone on to publishing novels and works in other fields, including film and game writing.
• On Spec showcases artwork by Canadians, including Aaron Paquette, First Nations painter, writer, keynote speaker, and workshop facilitator.
• The On Spec story “Beach Head” by Daniel LeMoal was selected and printed in Best Horror of the Year, Volume 1, by award-winning editor Ellen Datlow. Stories appearing in On Spec  receive Honorable Mentions in several “Year’s Best” anthologies.
• On Spec’s editors are volunteers, devoting time to On Spec as a labour of love to showcase Canadian talent. The editors come from a variety of backgrounds, including educators, biologists, and more. Since the magazine’s inception in 1989, there has been a strong women’s voice in the publication that was unusual in science fiction and fantasy.

 Concerns about the recent cut in Canada Council funding:

• The shortfall of $20,000 will make it difficult for On Spec to operate and cover production costs. On Spec must find other options to continue showcasing Canadian writers and artists, and sharing Canadian content with our readers. The amount represents about 30% of On Spec’s total budget.
• The lack of an appeals process with the Canada Council jury decision. The finality of the decision is legislated without offering an opportunity for another review and perspective. This makes it difficult for On Spec and other arts organizations to find an avenue to engage Canada Council on how to meet the jury’s criteria for following years. In the City of Edmonton, the Edmonton Arts Council established an appeals process for non-profit Arts Operating Grants.
• Canada Council only provides summary information without measurable goals and reviews to help arts organizations keep on track from jury warnings. The comments are provided in a vacuum without providing On Spec and other organizations with the opportunity to show improvement and engage Canada Council on better meeting the jury’s requirements.

How On Spec is dealing with the cut in Canada Council funding:

• On Spec Magazine will continue publishing well-written speculative fiction short stories and poetry, with a focus on showcasing voices from Canadian writers with diverse backgrounds.
• The editorial staff and other members of On Spec will discuss and determine new directions for the magazine, with the goal to continue providing our subscribers with well-written fiction.
• On Spec will concentrate on promoting our digital editions of our publication and subscriptions, with the plan to extend to online distributors such as Kobo. Currently the digital edition can be found on Weightless Books:
• A Patreon account has been set-up to encourage sustainable monthly donations from On Spec supporters.

Please feel free to send the reasons why you support On Spec Magazine to have your voice heard by the Minister of Canadian Heritage, The Honourable Shelly Glover (Min.Glover@pch.gc.ca). You can also cc the Chair of Canada Council, Director and CEO Simon Brault (director@canadacouncil.ca).

Sending separate letters to your Member of Parliament, the culture critics Pierre Nantel (NDP) and Stephane Dion (Liberal), and Elizabeth May of the Green Party, allows your voice to be heard.

Note that letters sent to Ministers or MPs at Parliament Hill do not require a stamp. Addresses are available online: http://www.parl.gc.ca/SenatorsMembers.aspx?Language=E

The Honourable Shelly Glover

Minister of Canadian Heritage and Official Languages

For regular mail:

The Honourable Shelly Glover

Minister of Canadian Heritage and Official Languages

House of Commons

Ottawa, Ontario

Canada

K1A 0A6

Simon Brault

Director and CEO

Canada Council for the Arts

150 Elgin St

P.O. Box 1047

Ottawa, Ontario  K1P 5V8

Thank you for your support. We appreciate it takes many voices to be heard.

The On Spec Team.

50,000 PAGE VIEWS

TODAY, SUZENYMS REACHED 50,000 PAGE VIEWS. (As I write this, it's been 50,424 page views to be exact.) 

I resurrected the blog last April, 2013, after letting it lie dormant for two years. What I did was to turn it from a strictly personal blog into one I thought people might find more interesting - a blog devoted to writing and editing, with a little bit of my own book promotion thrown in. What really started it was this - Why Didn't On Spec Buy My Story? - which I posted on April 24, 2013. To date, it remains one of the more popular posts on the blog.

It's not only been great, but surprising to reach this milestone. To all of you who have visited Suzenyms, who have left thoughtful comments, who have contributed as guest authors, and who continue to support me in my efforts here, thank you. You have helped me do it.

- Susan.

A CLOSER LOOK AT ON SPEC EDITOR: EILEEN BELL

WAY BACK IN MAY, 2013, I POSED SEVERAL SHORT INTERVIEW QUESTIONS to the On Spec editors (including myself) so that writers might have a better understanding of our tastes and what we are looking for in the stories submitted to us. As we are about to open a new submission window for both the Punk themed issue and our regular issues, I thought it would be a good idea to pose those same questions to our new editors, Eileen Bell, Brent Jans, Constantine Kaoukakis, and Laurie Penner. Here is how Eileen Bell answered my questions: 

1). What kinds of stories appeal to you most? Do you lean towards a particular type of story or style? I will read almost anything speculative, but lean toward the dark and/or the humorous. The story with the most appeal for me will have a definite beginning, middle, and end. Yes, I’m actually looking for a plot! I want believable characters that leap off the page. Good, crisp dialogue. Enough description to bring the story to life, without overwhelming it. Oh, and there is a special place in my heart for stories set in Canada. 

2). What types of stories don't appeal to you? What are your pet peeves, writing-wise? High fantasy does not appeal to me, and lately I’ve found that I’m reading much less historical fiction. Absolutely nothing wrong with either -- they are just not what I’m reading right now. Pet peeves? If there’s too much description, no matter how beautifully written, I’ll skip it to get to what happens next. For me, in a short story especially, too much of it is the kiss of death. I believe that every bit of description must have a reason for being there. If it doesn’t, take it out. Another peeve is an unsatisfactory ending. If I’ve decided to go on this journey with you, please give me an ending that is well written and as thoughtful as the beginning. Oh -- and don’t get too clever with your writing. Some like that, but I find it distracting. I’m there for the story. 

3). What advice would you give to a writer submitting to us? Read back issues of the magazine to make sure that your work fits. Before you send your manuscript, proofread. Just using spell check won’t do it. (We can tell when you do that, you know.) Follow the guidelines. But above all else, write a story you love. 

4). Please list any credits you'd like mentioned (ie. book pubs, editing/publishing involvement), followed by a small bio. I’ve had short fiction published in magazines and several anthologies, including the double Aurora Award winning Women of the Apocalypse and the Aurora winning Bourbon and Eggnog. My first novel, a paranormal mystery called Seeing the Light, (Tyche Books) http://tychebooks.com/books/seeing-light/ will be out in October, 2014. When I’m not writing, I’m living a fine life in my round house (that's in a perpetual state of renovation) with my long suffering husband and two dogs. Oh, and the first story I ever had published was in On Spec!

Thanks, Eileen. For those of you who want to see what those of us who represent the 'old guard' like and don't like, you can check out these links:

For Diane Walton
For Barb Galler-Smith
For Ann Marston
For Barry Hammond (poetry)
and for myself, Susan MacGregor

(P.S. And I, for one, adore Historical SF, so if you've written one, don't worry! Eileen and I will battle it out. And Barb might wade in to wage war with us, too. - S.)

ON SPEC'S CANADA COUNCIL FUNDING HAS BEEN CUT

I CAN HARDLY CALL THE FOLLOWING A GUEST POST by ON SPEC's MANAGING EDITOR, DIANE WALTON. This is more in the nature of bad news. As well as displaying it here on Suzenyms, we will also post it on the On Spec website, the I Read On Spec Facebook page, and elsewhere. I leave it to Diane to share this with you:

TO BE FAIR, WE WERE WARNED.

After many years of providing On Spec with sustainable production funding, a peer jury for the Canada Council for the Arts has denied our application for a grant to produce issues during 2015. This amounts to a hit of anywhere from $20,000 to $25,000. In real dollars. As in “paying the writers and artists” dollars. As in “paying the printer” dollars. 

The 2014 jury based their evaluation on reading our grant application, financial reports and supporting documentation, along with perusing copies of the four issues we had published during 2013. In our early years, jury comments were generally of the “good fiscal management, good production values, strong editorial voice and knowledge of the target audience” variety. Then the tone of the comments began to change; it seemed to grow more sinister, and while the grants were grudgingly awarded, we were repeatedly admonished to publish “a higher quality of fiction”, and to ensure we did our due diligence for proof-reading, design, and copy-editing. (That last part is ironic, since we have more proofreaders now than we ever had when we started this magazine. And our design has always received excellent feedback.) Then we got the “two strikes” warning, and so the writing was on the wall. 

With each grant application over the years, we have included thoughtful reviews of our issues from the people most familiar with the Science Fiction and Fantasy sub-genre. We have even provided letters of recommendation from some of Canada’s most respected academics in the field—letters attesting to the high quality of our fiction. 

This information appears to have been either ignored or else dismissed by the jury. I will quote from the letter we received with this year’s jury comments:

While they recognized the important contribution On Spec makes by publishing works in an under-represented genre, they felt that the quality of writing remained low. They also noted copy-editing errors, and poor production, design and layout quality.

Each issue of On Spec goes through a rigorous process of copy-edits and proofing, right up to the final approval of the printer proofs. While a few errors may slip through, it is a slap in the face to our designers and production staff, to say that our production quality is poor. While not a professional publication, we make every attempt to appear professional with a fraction of the budget allocated to larger publications. 

In view of the quality of the writing, I want to tell you that the editors of On Spec have never compromised on the fiction they select for publication. So without concrete examples of what the jury members considered to be such “low quality writing”, (surely it wasn’t every story in all four issues!) we had no idea what they meant when they were asking us to find “better” fiction. Since we select stories for their readability and engagement with the reader by our own standards, it seems we were destined to fail when judged by their standards. (One juror several years ago did comment that perhaps buying fiction from “better-known” Canadian authors was the solution, which clearly showed their inability to understand our mandate. But that’s not the discussion I want to have here.) 

After twenty-five years, we should know what our own readers want and like. It is painfully apparent the juries at Canada Council do not. But who are we publishing On Spec for? While it has been suggested that perhaps it is time we begin to kowtow to the tastes of these gatekeepers of Canadian literary culture, we simply cannot do this. 

I do not believe I am being unrealistic. A publishing grant is not, and should not, be an expectation. But this particular rationale for denying funding is little more than an insult to everyone who helps to make On Spec, as well as the people who continue to read and enjoy it. 

Where do we go from here? 

Well, in some ways, that is up to you, our readers and supporters to determine. Obviously, some hard decisions will need to be made for how we approach the coming year. We must remain positive. We have considered the option of going completely digital, although print copies could be available as print on demand. And we still have some grant funding that may continue to support us. 

How can you help?

1. Buy a subscription! Buy one for yourself, your friends and family, your school, your library—anyone you think would enjoy reading good Canadian Literature of the Fantastic.
2. If you don't want a print subscription, then you can purchase a digital version of On Spec. Weightless Books also has a bunch of excellent back issues available at a lower cost.
3. Tell more people about On Spec. Word-of-mouth is still our best form of advertising.
4. Send us a donation or gift, by cheque, to On Spec, PO Box 4727, Edmonton, AB T6E 5G6, or through our PayPal account (onspec(at) interbaun.com), or other means. Feel free to contact us at onspec(at)onspec.ca for information on how you can help.
5. In lieu of a one-time donation, sign up at our Patreon page to commit to a sustaining monthly donation. Patreon helps support artists and creators, and it allows for crowd-sourcing for amounts as little as $1 or $2 monthly. That's less than the change that falls under the seat cushions of your sofa.

We are in the process of figuring out how best to acknowledge larger donations and regret that we cannot issue a charitable donation receipt.  Just remember, your gift is a validation of the contribution that On Spec makes to Canada’s body of literature of the Fantastic.

Last word:

While the Canada Council jury decision on funding is final, and there is absolutely no possibility of a change of heart, you may still wish to contact the Canada Council and have your feelings made known to the members of this year’s jury. Their names will be published later this year, as is the CC policy. Send your communication to info@canadacouncil.ca. and (politely) ask that your comments be provided for the people who juried this year’s Grants to Literary and Art Magazines. Please remember, you are Canadian.

Thank you for your continuing support and good wishes,

Diane Walton, Managing Editor, On Spec Magazine.

(ADDITIONAL NOTE: Please check this latest post on how you can help.)