Tag Archives: brett alexander savory

Aurora Award Finalists

The finalists for the Prix Aurora Awards has now been announced.

While I’ve only read two of the nominated works for Best English Novel so far, (Under Heaven, by Guy Gavriel Kay, and Watch, by Robert J. Sawyer), I’ve read the previous two novels in the series by Hayden Trenholm (nominated for Stealing Home, previous novels reviewed are Defining Diana and Steel Whispers.), and have attended readings by Sawyer, Trenholm and Marie Bilodeau for their nominated works.

I’m also pleased that Suzanne Church (a writer here in the Waterloo Region),  Matt Moore, and Hayden Trenholm are finalists for Best English Short Story. Sawyer is also a finalist for Best English Poem, as are Carolyn Clink, and Helen Marshall.

Douglas Smith (of whom I’ve mentioned the story Radio Nowhere from the Campus Chills anthology) has a nomination for Best English Related work for his collection of stories (Chimerascope), and John Robert Columbo and Brett Alexander Savory are finalists for the Tesseracts Fourteen anthology.

There’s a good article in the Metro News about an Ottawa based group of writers named the East Block Irregulars which includes Trenholm, Moore and Bilodeau which shows how a great group can challenge writers to excel. All of the members of the group have reason to be proud of these accomplishments.

Matt Moore holding Steel Whispers

A photo of SF writer Matt Moore holding his colleague Hayden Trenholm’s novel Steel Whispers. Both Moore and Trenholm are nominated for Best English Short Story.

Writer pay rates

There have been two stories going around recently, about writers and publishing. The first was the whole harlequin vanity press. The more recent story has to do with pay rates for different markets.

I’m a beginning writer. I have submitted a single story to the Tesseracts 14 anthology, which pays $50 for stories under 1500 words, rising to $100 for 5000 words. That works out to 3 cents a word for low word-count stories, and 2 cents a word for longer stories. This doesn’t meet SFWA requirements for a pro market — although it would have prior to 2004 — but it’s certainly better than the 1/5 of a cent per word that Black Matrix is offering.

The fact that Tesseracts is a well respected anthology of Canadian imaginative literature (SF/F/H etc) year is great. The editors of the anthology this year are John Robert Colombo, a much respected editor of Canadiana, and Brett Alexander Savory, publisher of ChiZine publications. I believe that having a publication in Tesseracts would enhance my career. Do I think this particular story will make it? I’ll find out soon, as they have a short reading period, but I’ll likely receive my first rejection.

As Jim C. Hines notes, “most of us suck when we’re new”. Rejection can be horrible, but it’s also a reason to get better. It’s one of those Calvin and Hobbes “character building” exercises. I would rather submit a reasonably good story and have it rejected than submit crap that does get published. Don’t get me wrong, I look forward to seeing my name in print someday, but I’m not looking for fast self-validation.

One thing that Scalzi notes, but which has been overlooked in some cases, is that there is a difference between “for the love, no one is making money” publications, and businesses launching multiple magazines, as well as two book lines.

Shaun Duke has thrown his two bits in. Small markets, such as the Survival by Storytelling magazine, are perfectly justified in their pay scale: a portion of royalties only. In fact, from their magazine’s submission guidelines, 2/3 of all profit goes to the issue’s contributors, while the remaining third goes to Young Writers Online. Duke isn’t making anything from this.

In regards to publishers such as Black Matrix, I can’t currently justify submitting a story to a for-profit company that pays so poorly. This is no longer a “for the love” market. Rachael Swirsky guest-blogged on Jeff VanderMeer’s blog about the value of certain publishing credits. I would have to agree with her, and with Cat Rambo, editor for Fantasy Magazine. Too many unknown credits on a cover letter are a possible sign that the author may have been underselling their work, and may be used to lower standards. As a slush reader, I have anecdotal evidence to support this.

Markets like this exist. They will likely continue to exist. The moral question here, is whether the publisher is making money without paying their writers adequately. What else do they offer? Why would an author submit to markets like this? I won’t, but others have and will. So long as they know what they’re getting into, that’s great.

Scalzi may have come across a little harsh. But really, when has he ever shown gentle softness and tact? This is the man who has published a Hugo-winning essay collection criticizing the hate mail he’s received. He may have seen a few more hits on his blog than usual from this incident, but he already has a big audience. Instead, he’s using his platform to call out a group that appears to be underpaying writers for profit. He’s trying to help the community out. It’s unfortunate that this comes across as an attack on all publications.

Jeff VanderMeer writes about goals in Booklife, suggesting that “many writers never progress in their careers — except in a shambling, two-steps-forward-one-step-back way — because they always focus on the moment, and the moment after that” (p 20). What does submitting to a market such as this accomplish for your long-term career goals, that submitting to a better paying market doesn’t? Maybe having to wait a little longer by submitting to multiple, more discriminating markets first might be worthwhile? After all, the story is written, you can start writing the next while shuffling the manuscript between markets. Writing and publishing books is a lengthy task. Use some discretion, and some patience.

New blog posts to this story include another Fantasy Magazine slush reader, and also now assistant editor, Molly Tanzer, which is full of fantastic advice.

Another post is from Nick Mamatas, a very “to the point” kind of response.

There has also been a followup to Rachael Swirsky’s posting on Jeff VanderMeer’s blog.