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.

LETTERS TO THE SLUSH PILE #6

Dear X and Y,

I'm writing to you both because although your stories are different (X, yours is a contemporary fantasy featuring trolls, and Y, yours is an epic fantasy with were-foxes) they both have the same problem in common. Both trolls and foxes aren't really trolls or foxes. They're human beings running around in troll and fox suits.  

You've both told me an engaging story. I was interested in your plots and the troubles your characters encountered. Your main drawback is you both need to show me how your characters are different from human beings. When I read about dog, cat, dragon, elf, dwarf, or even bug-eyed monster protagonists (or antagonists), I want to have a sense of their dog-ness, cat-ness, dragon-ness, etc., - whatever separates and makes them really different from us. Intrigue me with your insights about their instincts, abilities, talents, understanding of their world - perhaps even their social structures and morality. Do your research. Mine your imagination. Show me something I won't expect or will make me think, 'Yes! That's how they would be.'

You're both good writers. With a little thought, I'm sure you won't this find hard to do.

- Susan.

LETTERS TO THE SLUSH PILE #5

Dear -------,

I’m really torn over your story. You make so many basic errors, yet your prose is quite wonderful. You’ve taken some risks, you’re reaching towards a sophistication as a writer. Like most of us, I think you just need a bit of guidance. Here are the issues I had with your piece.

What you’ve sent me is an ‘in-depth, evolving over time’ character sketch. It’s a great character sketch. The problem is, it’s presented through your protagonist who talks about a more fascinating secondary character. A few things happen to your main character, but not enough. Still, the elegance with which you tell the story - so strong on character but not so much on plot - is enough to sway me into passing it along to the other editors.

As for technicalities, your story is a copy-editor’s nightmare. Here are the things I’d have you correct:

- Change the title. It has nothing to do with the story. It doesn’t work as a metaphor either, which is where I think you were going with it.

- Do NOT use different sizes of fonts to indicate yelling, fading voices, etc.

- I realize you’ve used italics and plain text to indicate changes in time and scene. Within those sections, please be consistent in terms of present and past tenses. Indent every paragraph. Within italicized areas, if you choose to indicate emphasis (which you might normally, with italics) return the word or text to plain font.

- Avoid clichés. You’ve given me some wonderfully fresh metaphors, a pleasure to read. Please don’t ruin my appreciation of your ability by slipping into tired phrases. You've shown me you're capable of so much more.

- Please be consistent in using either American or Canadian/British spellings. One or the other, but not both. On Spec prefers Canadian spelling.

Now back to the story. You need a stronger end in terms of what happens to your protagonist (so in terms of plot). At the moment, the piece feels lopped off. I read your story twice. My initial impression was you've used what should be your end as your opening hook. On second read, I’m not so sure I agree with this now, meaning, I can live with it, but you still need a stronger end.

As I said, I’ll pass your story on to the other editors for their comment. After discussing it, it may be that we’ll ask you for a revision. If we don’t, you might want to think about the piece overall. Whatever happens, I hope you take this letter in the support that it’s meant. I think you have a great future ahead of you as a writer.

All the best - Susan.

LETTERS TO THE SLUSH PILE #4

Dear ------,

I have to say, it was a real delight to read your story! I've read just over a third of the slush assigned to me, and yours was the first that really made me smile. I like all kinds of work and all types of stories - from the silly, to the poignant, to the dark, to the dramatic. Yours was a rare gift - a fun read! I really have nothing to criticize about it. I'm sure the other editors will enjoy it as much as I did when they get around to reading it. Of course I am passing it along. Of course, I will fight for it. (I doubt I'll have to fight very much, if at all).

I hope to copy-edit your story (which, truth be told, doesn't need much - I think the only thing I would tighten is a very small section of your dialogue). Why did I enjoy it so much? Because, despite your characters being 'types', they were still original and refreshing enough, the situation they found themselves in was ridiculous, and the end was perfect, considering their foibles.This is the entertainment business. You entertained me.

Thank you so much for submitting --------- to On Spec. I see you've sent us a few other pieces. I look forward to reading them too, as well as telling you eventually, that your story was the one I was raving about.

Keep up the marvelous work!

- Susan.

LETTERS TO THE SLUSH PILE, #2

Dear ------,

Perusing the slush, I was pleased to see your name among the lists. You're a great writer. I've read and enjoyed your work before, not only in On Spec but in other magazines and anthologies - which is why I was a bit surprised by what I read this time. 

I'm on page four, and I only have the vaguest idea of what's happening. I'm not sure whether you're experimenting with style or what. That's your prerogative, of course. 

Because of the way you've set things, I think you've overwritten the story, reaching for dramatic effect before I know or care enough about your characters. In places, your narration is getting in the way, drawing too much attention to itself (and pulling me out of the story). Single sentences layered as paragraphs give visual impact, but I wouldn't use them so soon in the plot. It's like thunder rumbling overhead before the sky has a chance darken. I'd leave this device for later, once the plot (and reader empathy) warrants it. 

I stopped reading on page four. I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and go back and read the rest of your story. If it grabs me, we'll deal with the problems. I hope it does. Fingers crossed. 

- Susan.

QUICK TRICKS FOR THAT FINAL EDIT: GUEST POST by EILEEN BELL

AT THE PURE SPECULATION FESTIVAL,  I had the pleasure of sharing a Pure Spec Idol* panel with Eileen Bell (Barb Galler-Smith, Sandra Wong, and Billie Milholland were also part of our crew). During the panel, Eileen had some great things to say about the editing tricks she uses, so I asked her right then (nothing like putting her on the spot) if she'd do a guest post for Suzenyms. Eileen's a good friend; she said 'yes'. I'm happy to share her editing tips here, with you. 

BY THE TIME YOU GET TO THE FINAL EDITING STAGE of your manuscript, you've probably looked at it a hundred times and are heartily sick of it. You’ve used spell check, and you’re pretty sure there aren’t any other mistakes. Really though, you just want the thing to go away. 

In a perfect world, this is when you put the manuscript in a drawer for a while. When you look at it again, days or weeks or even months later, you’ll see the mistakes. The typos, double words, formatting problems, and the nasty way your main character’s name changed from Sally to Sylvia, and then back to Sally. In other words, you’ll see your work with fresh eyes. But what do you do if you don’t have the luxury of time? You fool your eyes into seeing your work in a fresh, new way, so you can catch those errors you just don’t see anymore. This can be done in four (sort of) easy steps: 

1. Find all the words you use far too often. They may be weasel words** (words that either serve no purpose, or show there might be a problem in your writing) or they might just be your new favorite words. (I got hooked on the word “cool” while I was writing a manuscript, and when I searched, I found out I’d used it 55 times. Really.) Everybody has them, and now is the time to root them out. 

Use the search function to find out how many of these favorite words you have, and how many times you’ve used them. You might have to give yourself a minute to get over the shock and horror of some of the numbers that pop up, but after that, go through your manuscript and either remove or replace these words, one at a time. DON’T just search and remove all of them at one go, because some might be fine where they are. This is the time to decide.

2. Once all the extra words are gone, it’s time to look for the tiny mistakes still strewn through your manuscript. If you have a proofreading function in your writing program, use it. It will catch some of the errors. Then, go over the manuscript again, and this time, change up the look so any mistakes that are left will pop out at you. 

If you edit on your computer, try using a different font, or a different color. Change the size of the page. I use the Zoom function on my writing program and make the page twice as large as usual. I can really see the typos and other mistakes this way.

Try reading your manuscript from the last page to the first. This trick breaks up the story so it can’t pull you in. This way, you can concentrate on the words—and the mistakes. 

Print out a hard copy, and edit it the old fashioned way. This is remarkably effective, because it  changes the medium (paper, not computer screen) and how you look at it (down at the pages, not up at your screen). You’ll be surprised at what you catch. 

I highly recommend reading your manuscript out loud. Every time you stutter, or slow down, recognize that there’s a problem. If you see what the problem is, fix it immediately. If you only know that there is a problem, mark it in some way (I use highlighting) so you can go back to it and fix it later. And if you ever catch yourself saying, “What I really meant was...” it’s time to rewrite that section. 

This should eliminate most of the mistakes you can see. This leaves the ones you can’t. 

3. Check for correct spacing between words, and between sentences. I use the “View Invisibles” function on my writing program, which shows me, with a nice little blue dot, every time I’ve pressed the space bar. It might seem silly, but I always find double and even triple spaces where there should only be one. And sometimes, I find other formatting issues, and I can fix them, too. 

4. Finally, check the publisher’s guidelines one last time, to make absolutely certain you have set up the manuscript properly. Fix whatever needs fixing and then, your manuscript should be ready to go. I know. Sounds like a lot of work for tiny errors you can’t even see anymore. But here’s the deal. They HAVE to be corrected, because even though you can’t see them, your potential publisher will.

**For an in-depth look at weasel words, go to Melissa Jagears’ blog. (link to http://melissajagears.com/writer-resources/writing-helps-links/weasel-word-list/)

Eileen's Bio: Eileen Bell (also known as E.C. Bell) has had her short fiction published in magazines and several anthologies, including the double Aurora Award winning Women of the Apocalypse (Absolute XPress) and the Aurora winning Bourbon and Eggnog. The Puzzle Box (EDGE Books Publishing) a collaborative novel she wrote with Billie Milholland, Randy McCharles, and Ryan McFadden, came out in August, 2013. Her first ‘I wrote this myself’ novel, Seeing the Light, will be available in November, 2014, through Tyche Books. When she’s not writing, she’s living a fine life in her round house (that's in a perpetual state of renovation) with her husband, her two dogs, and her ever hungry goldfish. Find Eileen online at: Webpage:  http://www.eileenbell.com/, Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/eileen.bell.90. Twitter: https://twitter.com/ApocalypseWoman 

Eileen’s Upcoming Release: Seeing the Light is a paranormal mystery novel to be released November, 2014, by Tyche Books (http://tychebooks.com/announcing-seeing-the-light/). The book is based in Edmonton—and the Palais office building is based on the Arlington Apartments, built in Edmonton in 1909 (and home, briefly, to a serial killer!): Marie Jenner has never had much luck. Her job sucks. Her apartment – the one with the unbreakable lease – has a ghost. And worst of all, her mother won’t let up about her joining the “family business.” Since that business is moving the spirits of the dead on to the next plane of existence and doesn’t pay at all, Marie’s not interested. She wants a normal job, a normal life. That’s not too much to ask, is it? Apparently, it is. Even when she applies for the job of her dreams, Marie doesn’t get what she wants. Well, not entirely. She does get the job – but she also gets another ghost. Farley Hewitt, the newly dead caretaker of the building, wants her to prove his death isn’t an accident, and she’s pretty sure he’s going to haunt her until she does. All she wants is normal. She isn’t going to get it!

(Thanks, Eileen! Really looking forward to reading Seeing the Light when it's available!)   

* If you're not sure what Pure Spec Idol is, it runs pretty much the same way the TV show does, except contestants submit the first few pages of their manuscripts anonymously. The editors put up their hands to stop the reader from reading further, when they hit a point where they would stop reading because of a writing problem. Once three editors put their hands up, they're expected to explain why. I've been on quite a few of these, the panel is usually great fun, and contestants usually find the feedback helpful. It's also a hoot for the audience if the reader throws in a few ringers for the editors. At this last convention, Billie Milholland tossed us the opening from J. D. Salinger's Catcher in the Rye. None of us recognized it, and we all criticized it. :-) 

ME, MYSELF, AND I: A CLOSER LOOK AT ON SPEC EDITOR, SUSAN MacGREGOR

AND NOW IT’S MY TURN, to answer the questions I put to my fellow On Spec editors. I hope these posts are helpful and give writers a better idea of what we look for in submitted work: 

1). What kinds of stories appeal to you most? Do you lean towards a particular type of story or style? When I think in terms of what stories I want to see in On Spec, I think in terms of variety. Like some of my fellow editors, I prefer strong pieces told in a straightforward style, but I’m also as likely to choose prose that is more dense, more of a challenge to read, and—in my mind, more sophisticated in presentation. This also applies to point of view. I don’t prefer one POV over another. First Person works as well for me as Third Person Limited, Second Person, or (as long as it’s done extremely well), Omniscient. For me, variety is what it’s all about. I would hate for On Spec to be seen as one thing in terms of content or style. Differences in editorial taste mean a better selection for readers.

That said, I do have preferences. I love stories that make me laugh. We don’t get enough humor (and don’t tell me humor is hard to write. Like anything, you just have to know what works). I love fantasies set in historical settings in alternative or parallel worlds. I love pieces that mix genres, my personal favorites are Steam-punk and Weird West, but anything that’s unusual or new will catch my eye. Unlike Robin, I like a little romance thrown into the mix now and then, as long as the story stays true to its speculative nature.

Give me stories that are well-seasoned with vivid description, have a high emotional content and present characters who are quirky, passionate, and imperfect but not weak. Tell me a story where your protagonist wants something badly and risks a great deal to get it, where he changes as a result of succeeding or losing, and where I'm touched by his outcome (or entertained). 

2). What types of stories don't appeal to you? What are your pet peeves writing-wise? Characterization is so important. I hate weak characters—those who waffle, are acted upon without taking a stand, let cruel fate toss them around, or who bore me with unimportant detail (exposition). Think of who you'd like to chat with at a party. I don’t like Mary Sue protagonists who are sweet and good (a beginning writer’s mistake if there ever was one, but I’ve also seen the same thing done by authors who should know better). I don’t like unfeeling killers of any ilk, mostly because they’re uninteresting. Any brute can kill. If you want to have a protagonist like that, show me what makes him or her tick. Give me a reason to agree with what they do, even reluctantly. (Reluctantly might even be better).

.

I can’t stand redundancy. Here’s an example: ‘They looked with their faces towards the moon shining in the night sky.’  If you don’t know what’s wrong with that sentence, send me a note and I’ll enlighten you.

3). What advice would you give to a writer submitting to us? Write every day, if you can. A writer’s ability improves over time in a strange, organic way that’s hard to pinpoint. Get feedback on your work, preferably from someone who writes at a higher level than you. Don’t be afraid to experiment—try working in different styles or genres; they'll broaden you. Take risks! (Write humor!) Make all of your work vivid and emotional, and let the reader in on your protagonist’s deepest thoughts and motivations. Most important: put your work away for a time before submitting it anywhere. A month’s absence often makes the errors stand out. Great work takes time to become that way. Trust your inner editor. She's probably right about what isn't working or what more needs to be done.

4). Please list any credits you'd like mentioned (ie. book pubs, editing/publishing involvement), followed by a small bio: I've been an editor with On Spec Magazine for over twenty years (since 1991) making me a member of the ‘old guard’. I love editing for two reasons: one—it gives me a lot of pleasure to look at a story and help the writer bring it to greater strength, and two, for some reason, I seem to be really good at this. I'm not sure why. However, I do see things others might miss, including what isn’t in a story and what should be. I see what’s outside the box.

As for my credits, I’ve edited two anthologies: Divine Realms (through the Ravenstone Imprint of Turnstone Press), Tesseracts Fifteen: A Case of Quite Curious Tales (Edge Books). My non-fiction book, The ABC’s of How NOT to Write Speculative Fiction (The Copper Pig Writers’ Society) has seen two printings, and I am revising it a third time as I present each section in this blog. I have had my short fiction published in On Spec, Northern Frights Five, and other venues, as well as in anthologies, A Method to the Madness (Five Rivers Publishing), and The Urban Green Man (Edge Books). Currently, I am working on the first draft of my third book, The Tattooed Rose. The Tattooed Witch, the first in the trilogy (of the same name), has been nominated for an Aurora award through the Canadian Science Fiction and Fantasy Association. I released the second book, The Tattooed Seer, this August. All three books have been, or will be, published through Five Rivers Publishing.

A CLOSER LOOK AT ON SPEC EDITORS: DIANE WALTON

And now to ask those same questions of our fearless leader, Managing Editor, Diane Walton. Diane is one of the original editors who gave birth to On Spec, way back in 1989. She has been the driving force behind the magazine for many years and manages to keep us all moving in the same  direction -- about as easy as herding gerbils. (Or raccoons, considering how some of us are a bit more feral. That's insider information. Buy me a drink at a con, and I'll tell you who's who.)

1). Diane, you’ve seen so many stories in the On Spec slush pile over the years. What kinds of stories appeal to you most? Do you lean towards a particular type of story or style?

                                                                             

I like stories with a powerful emotional ‘grab’. In other words, the protagonist has to go through a human experience (or ‘human-like experience’) that leaves me on the edge of my seat, wondering how they can possibly get past whatever life-changing event they’re encountering. The genre (SF, Fantasy, etc.,) takes a back seat to this.

2). What types of stories don't appeal to you? What are your pet peeves writing-wise?

I don't like self-indulgent First Person ‘Tell’ rather than ‘Show’ stories. It often lets an inexperienced author off the hook for having to show some kind of change in attitude or belief on the part of their protagonist. When it’s done poorly, all they do is observe. I also dislike ‘talking head’ stories. Something has to actually happen.

3). What advice would you give to a writer submitting to us?

We always suggest people should read a copy of On Spec to find out what we like. As much as I like to sell more copies, I’m not convinced this will give a writer any particular insight. So many authors write to us and insist their work will suit our style perfectly. That's for us to judge. My only advice is to learn to be more critical of your own work and ask yourself some serious questions: what is it about my protagonist that will compel a reader to keep turning pages? What would make them care?

4). Please list any credits you'd like mentioned (ie. book pubs, editing/publishing involvement) in a small bio:

Diane's Bio: Previously an author, my stories have been published on CBC Radio, in On Spec, Northern Frights and Divine Realms. I may even get back to writing some day, although I still enjoy reaping the rewards of being an editor. 

(And what an amazing editor, she is. She's the glue that holds us together. Thanks, Diane). 

Next Post: It should be about me answering the same questions, except I haven't written the post yet. Instead, next post will feature a letter sent to me about whether self-published work can be re-submitted to magazines and anthologies under First North American Serial Rights.

Stay tuned.

A CLOSER LOOK AT ON SPEC EDITORS: ANN MARSTON

AS I DID WITH ROBIN, BARB, AND BARRY, here are the same questions I put to Ann Marston. Ann has been a Fiction Editor with On Spec Magazine since 2009. She says she thoroughly enjoys being an editor:

1). What kinds of stories appeal to you most? Do you lean towards a particular type of story or style?

I really like space opera, good old-fashioned adventure stories where the heroes win spectacularly. However, what I'm looking for is a great story with a beginning, middle, and an end that works, with characters I can care for. I don't mind an anti-hero, but if the character is completely unappealing, I don't want to read about him, her, or it, and I really won't care about, "Yeah, but he gets what's coming to him in the end."

2). What types of stories don't appeal to you? What are your pet peeves, writing-wise?

I don’t like stories that contain foul language, violence and/or explicit sexual details that are put into the story merely to shock or disgust, rather than because they're integral to the story itself. I also don't like stories that wander aimlessly and end without any resolution of the problem.

Also, I become annoyed when I read a story where it’s obvious the author has not proofread it. When a story comes in full of grammatical and spelling mistakes, I always feel that if the author didn't care enough to make sure it was as readable as possible, why should I care enough to read it? Those who know me know I get a bit militant about never using "like" as a conjunction, and the lie/lay confusion.

3). What advice would you give to a writer submitting to us?

Write the best story you know how to write. Make sure it's a story, not just the outline of a great idea. We call those stories H.A.I.T.E. stories—Here's An Idea, The End. (If the prospect of what happens after your story ends is more exciting or intriguing that what happens in the story, it's a H.A.I.T.E.) Proofread your work. If you're not sure about something, look it up.

4). Please list any credits you'd like mentioned (ie. book pubs, editing/publishing involvement), followed by a small bio:

Ann's Bio: My publishing credits include six high fantasy books, Kingmaker's Sword, The Western King, Broken Blade, Cloudbearer's Shadow, King of Shadows, and Sword and Shadow, all published by HarperCollins Publishers and now reissued by Five Rivers Publishing as e-books. Kingmaker's Sword and Western King are now available as e-books or POD through Five Rivers, Amazon, etc., and Broken Blade will be available shortly. As well, two new books will be coming from Five Rivers once the Rune Blade series has been reissued. I've also had several short stories published, one of them in On Spec!

(Thanks, Ann.)  

Next Post: Diane Walton, On Spec Managing Editor

Stay tuned.
 

A CLOSER LOOK AT ON SPEC EDITORS: BARB GALLER-SMITH

As I did with Robin Carson, here are the same questions I put to Barb Galler-Smith. Barb has been a Fiction Editor with On Spec Magazine since 2008:

1). What kinds of stories appeal to you most? Do you lean towards a particular type of story or style? 

I especially like science-based stories and stories with realistic aliens who are not just people dressed up in rubber suits. A story can be either science fiction or space fantasy, but it must end with a positive emotional impact. I don't mean the end needs to be lovey-dovey or that the good guy wins; I mean that the end must be a logical one and it must satisfy, so I can say, "Yup, that's just right." As for style, I like it straightforward. Exquisite prose can woo me, but only if the story has a real engagement factor. A character without some kind of conflict that keeps him from getting what he wants will not work for me. I love getting to the end and saying, "Wow. That ended perfectly." I also like plot and characters in interesting settings. Lately, I've been drawn to stories based upon non-European myths. 

2). What types of stories don't appeal to you? What are your pet peeves, writing-wise? 

Most unappealing: stories with gratuitous violence, unnecessary gore, vulgarity (I will not read past the C-word unless it's in a context in which it's appropriate–that's never happened), or sexism, or racism for its own sake. I want a story, not a bunch of expletives that add up to nothing more than shock-value.

I am disappointed by stories that start strongly with a gripping first paragraph, and then back up to explain how the protagonist got where he was. If you need a back-story that's too big to tuck into the narrative, you're not writing a short story. I'm also not fond of present tense. If an opening is strong enough for me to read three or four paragraphs before I realize it's in present tense, the author has used it properly. Since I've been with On Spec, that's happened to me twice. 

Not so much a peeve is my desire for a complete story, usually with a middle. I hate HAITEs–Here’s An Idea, The End. Too many come across my desk. No development of plot or character means 'no sale' to me, no matter how well-written the story is.  Worse than that is a really good story that ends without a clear resolution. I'm left scratching my head and muttering, "WTF?"

3). What advice would you give to a writer submitting to us? 

Make sure we are the right market. Child protagonists are a hard sell to us, and we will never buy anything, no matter how fabulous, if it doesn't have at least a hint of a speculative element integral to the story.

Just tell the best story you can. Then make sure your punctuation and grammar are right. A lot of errors will get past me if I am engaged in the story, but there are a few things that will pull me out: wrong word usage, getting facts wrong (especially getting the science wrong), and too many fragments that suggest the author is unable to write a simple sentence.

4). Please list any credits you'd like mentioned (ie. book pubs, editing/publishing involvement), followed by a small bio: 

I've had a great working life: I've been a wildlife biologist, a librarian, a Humane Educator, a quarterly magazine editor, a science and language arts teacher, and a writer. I have both short and long fiction credits. My novels (in collaboration with US author Josh Langston) include an historical fantasy trilogy, The Druids Saga: "Druids" (2009), "Captives" (2011), and "Warriors" (forthcoming, August, 2013), through Edge Books Publisher, and, just for a change, a contemporary romantic comedy called "Under Saint Owain's Rock". 

Barb's Bio: Barb Galler-Smith loves all things science, living things, and history. And of course Shakespeare and her Super Spouse. They're all shiny.

(Thanks, Barb.)

Next Post: Barry Hammond, On Spec Poetry Editor

Stay tuned.