No one ends up publishing in The New Yorker by accident. And, I would argue, you have to read The New Yorker to write like things in The New Yorker. Sure, anyone can send the New Yorker a submission, but I don't think it has much of a chance if the writer isn't a reader and familiar with the type of work they publish. And all publications come with with certain styles or preferences that it's regular readers notice. These publications are not all the same, and it doesn't do a submitter any favors to think that. I feel like it's quite silly for a writer just to think, "This is my best story so I'll send it to the best publication whether I am familiar with what they publish at all." Knowing the market is going to have a direct connection to how successful anyone is with all these journals and magazines. The reader of these publications is always going to have an advantage over the blind submitter. There is a compass to this process, published regularly. I was a reader of the journals and magazines first and for a long time before I decided I wanted in. I can't imagine how much harder things would have been if I had wanted to publish in these places before being familiar with them. I don't think publishing for the sake of publishing is the way to go about this. For me, I wanted to be part of the scene and the collective conversations taking place in these pages. I wrote (for years) until I was good enough to get into the places I enjoyed reading. But I have to say it can humble you and even make you feel like a fraud to be taken so seriously. And when that happens, it's important to realize it didn't happen by accident.
I've taken a terribly long break from making any new submissions. I've been reading a lot and I have a few new stories, but I'm hesitant to send them anywhere just yet. A friend told me that it's okay. I'm more in a creating mood. The publications will still be there when my work is ready for them. At this point I'm aiming to have five or six new stories polished and ready by the fall when a lot of places reopen to submission.
Sorry for the late reply, not been on much lately due to real life stuff. It's more of a 'market viability' check, where the people providing the service supposedly are current agents and publishers with up to the minute industry knowledge. They look at your submission pack and opine on whether the book is likely to be marketable in the current climate (and if not why not) and critique your query letter and synopsis. Prices I've seen are in the £250-300 range and turnaround seems to average six weeks. I ended up plumping for it in a late-night 'well I'd probably just spend it on collectibles and fancy tea anyway' moment. On the one hand I sort of feel like it's another way to make money off desperate would-be novelists, but on the other I really am curious to see what a pro would make of my mess, so here we are. Happy to report back with a verdict on whether it was worth it if people are interested!
I have a story that I decided wasn't quite working, so I took the part I thought was working and completely rewrote the rest. Different characters, setting, etc. About 20% of the first story remains. Although it is in an altered form, it is still recognizably taken from the first story and is also arguably the heart of both stories. I'm thinking of submitting the second story to journals that rejected the first story. It is a gray area: what constitutes a revision and what constitutes a new story. Just wondered if anyone has done something similar and what was the result.
Never submitted flash fiction before. I'm surprised even this takes a long time... Edit: Rejections for short stories are coming quicker, including one that's 6.5k. One day rejection. Good times.
I know people will say to never resubmit a story. I mean these places mean it when they say no thanks. And I would be very careful about where you decide to resubmit if you plan to do so. I wouldn't just start resubmitting your story everywhere it's already been. Also, the closer the previous story made it, the more likely it will be remembered and this could backfire. If an editor thought your story was worth salvaging on account of his publication, he could have easily invited you to do a major revision (like you did) and resubmit. I've only been invited to revise and resubmit at one publication. It's a really good publication, but it was hard to make it so far and then get rejected. I was kind of upset about it. I remember thinking, "Why didn't they jest take buy my story and ask me to make these sort of changes? How big a deal were these changes? Sure, maybe it involves some substantial revision. Maybe I'll do nothing and someone else will take it or want to work with me. What does this place know anyway?" Um, turns out this place knew a lot. After this rejection stopped hurting. I made all the changes that were mentioned in my rejection. Even the ones I wasn't sure I agreed with. I put the work in just to see. When I sent it out again a bigger publication ended up buying it. But this is just a long way of saying, when a place wants to see a story again they let you know. That being said, I have resubmitted stories on my own when I've done revisions that sound similar to what you're talking about. I had one story I thought was so appropriate for a certain publication I ended up submitting it three times over about five years and it was finally accepted. But, in the end, the story that was accepted was so different than the one I had originally submitted. I would really space it out, and only send it to places you are actually reading and hold a strong belief that you've got a story they need to read again. Also, editors change all the time at many of the journals affiliated with universities which many of them are. I love publishing news and gossip so I guess I've sort of made a hobby out of knowing who's where and that sort of thing. I think you can do it, but be smart about it and really hone you resubmissions to very specific targets. And even better news it that you were able to elevate your work. It's probably best to focus on new markets with this story and new stories with the other markets. If you were able to really improve a story so much, it means you can write other stories of that quality. So, good job and good luck, my friend.
The way to really do a market viability check is through submission. And the way to know what pros think is to submit your work to them. That's going to mean more than whatever this company ends up telling you. I've never heard of the sort of thing you're talking about. At the same time, I can understand the appeal. If our work is being rejected we feel like we at least want to know why. I'm just saying I wouldn't really trust these guys to have the answers. Keep that in mind no matter what they end up telling you. But I too would be interested in hearing how this goes for you. It does sound like a way to make money off of writers. But I guess they still could produce sound advice, maybe? Please do keep us posted on your experience.
Acceptance pretty much always take longer than rejections. Ideally, you want to forget about submission because most of them are going to take a really hard time. My practice used to be that I would make at least one submission every week. Once you build it up, it's a good system to have stuff constantly going out and responses constantly coming in. I've slipped quite a bit in the last several months. But I would like to get back to it myself. Mastering patience it almost as important as mastering writing in the literary journal world. And, sure, you might get one-day responses from places, but I'm not sure you actually want to hear back so quickly. To me, it seems like no news is good news, at least for awhile or maybe even a really long time.
No. No. No. I don't know why you've got this all wrong. A new guide and compass is put out with every issue, you could say. If you want to sell short stories to publications, it's best to enter this world and be an avid reader of at least some of the places. Reading these stories does let you know more than anything else what they're looking for. It doesn't mean you have to write like any of the stories a specific place publishes, but you'll learn the range of what sort of stories they go for and a lot more. And it this is something that really works best to see for yourself by reading the journals, more so than if anyone were to tell you.
I am skeptical too to be honest. The only reason I even contemplated it was because it was recommended by an industry pro (who had no incentive to lie as far as I can tell). I am mostly looking at it as an experiment/educational experience. Will report back!
Not yet. Yesterday I had an inspiration to write a mirror story told from the point of view of another character in the story. I am not prolific; I am obsessive.
I just operate on a different type of system, it seems. I usually just work on a single story, refine it, get it critiqued, implemented changes and send it off. Then I start a new one. Rinse and repeat. Right now I have two stories out, so that's something. I should probably just hunker down and get about 10 stories written and then send things, but I'm perhaps too impatient. I've read your others posts. Thanks.
