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

The Submission Grinder

I’m grinding again today.

Those of us who write short stories generally follow Heinlein’s fifth rule of writing: send it out and keep sending it out until it sells. For lesser talents than Heinlein, that can take a while but never give up. I sold a story ten years after I wrote it. One editor’s meat is another editor’s poison.

There are various websites that give market information and allow you to track submissions but my favourite is The Submission Grinder, mostly because it’s free, though you can make a donation and I have once or twice.

I used to used Duotrope before they started charging. I even tried them after they started charging but found little difference for my SF and Fantasy purposes between them and the Grinder, though Duotrope may be better for other things.

So hurray for The Submission Grinder. May it live long and prosper.

 

Why stories get rejected

I regularly read and review On Spec: The Canadian Magazine of the Fantastic and also follow them online. It’s a great magazine. Today I received an interesting communication about why stories get rejected with a link to this article by editor Barb Galler-Smith.

Why Stories Get Rejected (Even Good Ones)

The email which conveyed this to me mentioned that in their recent open submissions period – which wasn’t long – On Spec received 500 stories. 500! I have the current issue at hand and it contains just 7 stories. You can see why so many are rejected.

Depressing. On the other hand, if you do sell a story somewhere – anywhere – remind yourself that it isn’t easy and feel free to be glad. There’s a lot of competition out there.

Eamonn Murphy