The Submissions Black Hole

As a follow up to yesterday’s positive post on The Submission Grinder I had, while Grinding, some negative thoughts about response times.

Now I know that small press magazines are often run by part-timers, that they receive zillions of stories and have many other tasks to do apart from reading. No doubt it’s difficult. But sometimes, sending off a story feels like throwing it into a black hole. I use a card file as well as Submission Grinder but still lose track at times.

One of my favourite publishers takes ages to respond. When the response is an acceptance it’s great, of course, but I do wish they would speed things up. A few times it’s happened that I’ve completely forgotten about a story until nearly a year after submission and only when going through my cards realize it’s still in limbo. This week I queried one sent off for an anthology – now closed – and it turns out the editor never received it due to some email glitch. (You don’t always get an acknowledgement so I didn’t consider the lack of one unusual.) Another one I had high hopes for sat in limbo for months. I queried it and got no response. Has the publisher gone out of business (that happens a lot)? Do they hate me? In the end, all you can do is give up and send it somewhere else.

The Submission Grinder is useful for looking up new markets and you can select how you prioritize them, by pay, response time or in alphabetical order. Often, I know a story isn’t going to cut it with the high paying markets and aim low. Rarely, I think enough of one to try it on Asimov’s or The Magazine of Fantasy and Science-Fiction but so far they have resisted my charms. Now and then, I prefer a quick response to slightly better pay and prioritize markets by that criteria. Oddly enough, the professional mags all respond (or bounce my rubbish) quickly. The smaller the publisher the longer the response time seems to be the general rule.

Ah well. As Inspector Clouseau said, ‘It is all a part of life’s rich pageant.’

Eamonn Murphy