How long to write that short story?

In my post the other day about professional rates for short stories, I mentioned taking 20 hours to complete a 5,000 word short story. Now, by complete I meant the entire process--first draft, rewrites, editing, throwing the damn thing on the floor and screaming because I can't make the ending work. You know, the typical short story writing process.

I rarely write those 20 hours in order. Usually I take time off and work on other stories. My process is to write several short stories at the same time. When I tire of one story, or hit a roadblock, I put it aside and work on another.

But a few writers pointed out in the discussion thread that they consider 20 hours for a 5,000 word story to be paint drying, grass growing slow. Nick Mamatas laughed at my estimate, adding "Hey, I like my latte HOT, so step on it!" John Scalzi said that in "20 hours of butt in chair, I wrote and did the initial edit of 'The God Engines,' which is 30,000 words," and that he'd write a 5,000 word story in five hours. I've heard of other writers working like Scalzi, i.e., writing in a near complete final form. Isaac Asimov was famous for doing this. 

Of course, there were also writers much slower than that. Jeff VanderMeer asked, "Why the f*#& would anyone *want* to write a 5k story in five hours? Then you're just churning out product." Rachel Swirsky said, "I'm slower than slow. I'm glacial. The idea of writing a 5,000 word story in 5 hours is amazing to me; the idea of writing a 5,000 word story in 20 hours is sort of amazing to me."

So this set me to thinking: How long does it take most writers to complete a 5,000 word short story?

I kept track of my writing time this weekend, to make sure I wasn't wrong about my story completion rates. After waking up with a great idea for a short story, I wrote 5,500 words in 8 hours. However, this was only the first draft, which predictably had major deficiencies (namely, the language needed to be cleaned up, 2 of the 3 characters were one dimensional, and the ending didn't quite work). After throwing the copy on the ground and screaming, I rewrote the story the next day. Add another 4 hours. At this point, I'm letting the story ferment for a few weeks, but I imagine it will need another 6-8 hours of rewriting and editing before I send it out, so my 20 hour estimate is pretty reasonable for how fast I write. And I should add that several of my stories have taken much longer than that.

So people: How long does it take you to write a typical 5,000 word story?

Clarkesworld Magazine's year in slush

Clarkesworld Magazine has a fascinating post up detailing the last year of handling their slush pile. Here's the breakdown:

• Total Submissions 4269
• Days open 320
• Avg. Subs Per Day 13.3
• # of Authors 2721
• Highest # of Subs from a Single Author 25

Those numbers indicate the incredible hurdles emerging writers have to overcome to be published in a pro magazine. 2721 authors submitted 4269 stories in 2009 to Clarkesworld. Wow! Since Clarkesworld only publishes 48 24 stories each year (two per month), that means you have a 1% .5% chance of having your story accepted. Add in that half of the stories Clarkesworld publishes are set aside for "established" authors, and that lowers the odds even more for new writers.

Of course, the quality of your writing can dramatically change the odds. For example, somehow I suspect the author who submitted 25 stories to Clarkesworld in 2009 was not creating professional level stories. Still, new writers should keep these numbers in mind when they consider what it will take to become published.

UPDATE: Thanks to Jay Lake and Robert Laughlin for pointing out my mistaken math (both times). Duh on me. Obviously 2 x 12 is 24, not 48. Guess my brain wasn't working too well this morning. And as Robert pointed out, the actual percentage is .56%, which should be rounded to .6%, but I left it at .5 because I hate rounding.

John Scalzi and privilege

Dear John Scalzi:

When I first read your "privilege" comment on my post about professional rates for short stories, so many responses popped to mind. I thought about pointing out I was unable to respond until now because I've been working all day to support my family, which meant I didn't have the privilege of an immediate answer. Or that of course $250 is better than $100--especially on my family's tight budget--but sometimes people defer short-term gain so we can reach our long-term goals.

And most importantly that yes, I am privileged, as is anyone with a full-time job these days. But that you are also privileged to have worked your way to such writing success that you can draw a line in the ink and say below this cash point, I will not publish.

But I don't have to respond with any of that because of Jeff VanderMeer's amazing comment (pan through the comments section to find it), which to me is the final word on all this. He described so perfectly the reasons and strategies which cause writers to submit to different publications. So please read Jeff's words. And let me simply add a small "Hell yeah, Jeff! Wish I'd said that!"

Yours in privilege,

Jason Sanford

Where to shove your self-published crap

So I'm talking to a friend about publishing, and a friend of a friend's friend (FFF) slides in--you know the scene, where an intimate conversation is interrupted by the scurrying intrusion dance of a damn conversation hacker--and my friend, whom I'm trying to convince to submit his amazing fiction manuscript to an agent, hears these words from the FFF's dung hole: "Why bother submitting. Publish it yourself."

And so my friend is exposed to the worst possible advice. FFF pulls his self published novel out of his backpack and flashes it like gold. Nevermind the tacky cover which FFF likely asked his kindergarten niece to whip together in Photoshop.  Nevermind the typo I discover on page 1 while flipping through the book as FFF regales my friend about the reasonable costs of self publishing. Nevermind that FFF brags of having sold hundreds of copies of his novel.

"Hundreds?" I ask. I glance at the copyright page. The book was self published in 2007. Hundreds across two years is nothing. Hundreds means your friends and family bought all the copies.

"It's so easy to do," FFF says.

At this point I fight to restrain the great heaping pile of stinking truth I want to throw at this FFF. Idiot! You paid to have no readers. You paid to showcase a poorly written and edited novel. You paid to humiliate yourself merely so you can go up to friends of friends and say you're a published author.

But I restrain all that. My friend glances at the FFF book and hands it back, wishing FFF the best of luck with his novel. FFF wanders off to find others to dazzle with his authorial shine.

Right then, I decide if my friend even hints that he's considering self publishing for his manuscript, I will strike him down. I will beat him bloody until some sense--or fear of self publishing--enters his head. But I shouldn't have worried. People who can actually write amazing stories and novels know the self publishing score. Yes, it's good for some things, but don't pretend self publishing takes the place of landing your book with a good publisher.

"So," my friend asks. "Know any good agents?"

Submit your stories, not your idiocy

When submitting your work, don't be an idiot. As a proof, two examples from my in-box:

• One author submitted a story to storySouth by way of me back in March. I responded immediately, stating that yes, I am still listed on the masthead in that vague "founding editor" role, but I have nothing to do with the day-to-day running of the magazine. To submit a story, check out their guidelines. The idiot's response: Wait seven months then ask me for an update on his submission. When I repeated above info and also sent my earlier email, the submitter explodes in anger because I "wasted his time."
   
• Another person is making the rounds in my in-box after submitting a story using the cc function. That is, he copied the emails of fifty magazines and sent the submission to all of us at once. This means not only does he look like an idiot, every time a rejection is sent back, every other editor also sees the message and is reminded of said idiocy.

I would not suggest either method as a path toward publication.

Update: Once the snail mail oozed its way into my mailbox today, lo and behold the snail had deposited a submission. For the record, storySouth never accepted mailed submissions, only electronic ones. So this person not only ignored the current storySouth guidelines, he ignored the old guidelines too and tracked down the physical address of the person who is no longer the storySouth editor. End result is I opened the sub, wrote note on sub, placed sub in SASE. A waste of one minute of my life and $3 postage on the submitter's part.

What the top SF/F editors want

If you write SF/F, then you must read "The Story Is All: Ten Fiction Editors Talk Shop" in the current issue of Clarkesworld Magazine. The article features interviews with most of the top SF/F editors in the field, and if you've been submitting blindly to their magazines then reading this article will be a eye-opening experience. Even experienced writers will learn a thing or two.

Rules of rejections

This is an old post, but I thought it would be good to bring it to people's attention again: The 8 Rules of Rejections. While all the rules are worth reading, I think rule #5 is particularly insightful: "Most rejection letters are a long, long way from direct, forthcoming, or meaningful."

Now that I'd given up day-to-day editing at storySouth, let me confess that submission editors don't want to go into great detail on why they rejected your story. We didn't like the story. That's all that matters. But we don't always say that. Maybe we don't want to hurt your feelings, or we want to encourage your writing. Maybe we like your other stories and simply think this one is poo. Or maybe we think you're psychotic and don't want you tracking us down at our house. So we reach into our bag of pleasant banter and tell you pleasant words to mollify you.

Such is life. But this is why it's never good for a writer to obsess on what a rejection letter says.

To dump or not to dump: An information dump primer

John Ottinger from the blog Grasping for the Wind asked me to do a guest post. The result: To dump or not to dump. In the post I both explore science fiction's long fascinating with the information dump, and discuss why authors should avoid doing the dump except on rare occasions.

Short story word counts—how long should a story be?

In my new review of Strange Horizons fiction for The Fix, I wander aimlessly through the intellectual wilderness while asking how long short stories should be. As most writers and readers already know, there are many different types of short stories, including flash fiction, novelettes, and novellas. But what's the breakdown of these story categories by word count, and how long should a particular story actually be? I reveal all in the review—or perhaps I don't. How's that for being coy?

I should also add that in the review, I gush all over the story “Nine Sundays in a Row” by Kris Dikeman. I strongly suggest lovers of trickster fantasies check out this wonderful tale.

The hard work that goes into being a successful writer

Leah Bobet is an up and coming fantasy and science fiction writer whose stories and poems have been published in places like Strange Horizons, Interzone, Realms of Fantasy, and a number of prestigious reprint anthologies. In addition to being a great writer, she obviously she has enough name recognition that her submissions don't get buried in the slush piles.

But despite this success, she still receives many more rejections than acceptances. I know this because she tracks her submissions on her website. For example, in 2003 she wrote 101,150 words of fiction and poetry, made 179 submissions, and received 151 rejections and 17 acceptances. As her success has grown through the years, her ratio of rejections to acceptances has improved, but she still receives many more rejects than acceptances. Such is the life of any writer.

I think Leah's submission statistics are a great illustration of the hard work a writer must put in to be successful. I suggest new writers look at her numbers. If you aren't willing to put in that type of effort, don't expect to be successful.

Editor aims to help writers--even boneheaded ones!

Edmund Schubert, editor of Orson Scott Card's Intergalactic Medicine Show, has written two must-read posts for new writers on his blog. The first, "Submission Basics," tells what every author should include on their submission: Their Contact Information! It's highly possible your cover letter will get separated from your sub somewhere in the editorial process. The next post is "Basic Definitions for Writers" and defines all those pesky words writers and editors throw around when talking about the submission process.

In addition to being a working editor, Edmund is also a fiction writer whose first novel Dreaming Creek will be published in two weeks. So I suggest giving him a listen, because he's experienced this business from both sides of the submission fence.

Top SF/F editors tell all

John Joseph Adams has published a great interview with three of the top SF/F magazine editors: Gordon Van Gelder, the editor and publisher of The Magazine of Fantasy & Science Fiction;Sheila Williams, the editor of Asimov’s Science Fiction; and Susan Marie Groppi, the editor-in-chief of Strange Horizons.

Adams gets the editors to explore how authors can get their stories to rise out of the slush piles, what plots they're tired of seeing, and more. Perhaps their best advice is that all writers should be readers, meaning you should continually read examples of the fiction you strive to write. The complete interview is here.

The secret of author bios: No cats!

Jason Sizemore at Apex Magazine recently published an essay about author bios titled "You're Boring Me!" As most readers and writers know, author bios are the self promotional blurbs that accompany most short stories and novels. As Jason states, these bios should help a reader learn more about a writer's works, so that said writer can perhaps gain another fan. Unfortunately, too many writers give bios consisting of attempts at humor or slice of life vignettes which, in the end, do not tell readers how to find more info on the author's writings. So the next time a writer feels the need to mention their cats in their author bio--don't!

SF/F quote of the day

From author Matthew Hughes, commenting on the Asimov's forum about whether there are too many depressing SF/F stories being written:

"No conflict, no story. An account of a hero at ease in paradise is just travel writing."

Literary spam from Geraldine Rodeger and Xlibris

Every author loves to receive fan mail. So the other day I open my e-mail account and what pops out but a message with the title of one of my short stories as the subject heading. My first thought is someone must have really loved or hated that story.

Then I opened said e-mail:

Dear Jason Sanford,

A very nice exchange of thoughts and statements ensue in your "One more Expert Speaks to a Jury" which was posted in TheDiagram.com. It would be a shame if your writings were not shared with a wider audience: how about coming out with your very own book?

Self-publishing is your best venue for getting your first book out. You become the master of your own work, having full creative control over editing, printing, and marketing processes. Full ownership rights, you also get to keep. This can also be your stepping stone into getting noticed by the traditional publishers who may want to pick your book up for future editions.

Do e-mail me for more details on how to get started self-publishing.

Sincerely yours,

Geraldine Rodeger
Xlibris Corporation

Wow. Just . . . wow. I was tempted to simply delete the message, but something I'd read in the most recent issue of the SFWA Bulletin came to mind. In their joint essay "The Clueless(Part 1)," Mike Resnick and Barry N. Malzberg rant against the belief that self publishing is the route to literary success. As they say, money flows to authors, not the other way around. Those who believe otherwise are usually naive and inexperienced authors looking for any way to succeed at their chosen field. Unfortunately for them, self-publishing is rarely the path to success.

The reason I'm outraged over this obviously spammed letter is that its plays on the hopes and dreams of people who may not know what that this same e-mail was likely sent to thousands of writers around the world. My suggestion: Run as fast as you can from Geraldine Rodeger and Xlibris.

Some Brief and Frightening Tips from George Saunders

I'm working on a review of the wonderful new anthology series Best of the Web--and yes, by using the word "wonderful" I obviously like their inaugural 2008 edition. I strongly suggest people order a copy. Anyway, one essay which jumped out at me in the book is "Some Brief and Frightening Tips from George Saunders" from Konundrum Engine Literary Review. This short essay is an advanced primer for writers, told in Saunders' unique voice and style. The sections on voice alone are worth worth checking out and the essay is highly recommended for all writers.

More on William Sanders and posting rejection letters

Guess I'm going to have to explain more about my previous comments on the William Sanders rejection letter. I totally agree with Tobias Buckell that the "context" argument from Sanders' supporters makes no sense. I've never used the term "those people" in my entire life. When I've heard the term used by others, it's never been in a good sense (such as "Those people are great!).

The more I think about this issue, the more I realize that if one receives a rejection with similar crap in it the best thing to do is post it online and expose said crap to the light of day. But the truth is that very few rejections will have content which calls for doing this. Just as it is unprofessional to call an editor every week and ask about your story's status, or to submit a handwritten manuscript, or to spam every editor under the sun with submissions, so too is it unprofessional to post a rejection letter online. Yes, the Sanders' letter seems to one of those "exceptions to the rules." But new writers shouldn't look at this situation and think, "Oh, I should post every rejection letter I receive online because that will bring me some attention." Odds are the attention you'd get would not be the good type of attention.

UPDATE: I don't know how I missed this, but on Buckell's website a woman named Nora, who has been published twice in Helix, posted a comment in which she says Sanders told her that because she criticized him in an online forum, he will no longer publish her stories in Helix. Unbelievable. While I stand by my view on (generally) not posting rejection letters, in Sanders' case this exposure was a good thing because it is allowing his festering sore of racism to be exposed to the world.

Never post an editor's rejection letter!

In case things aren't clear enough from the title of this post, let me repeat: Writers should never post an editor's rejection letter on the internet!

Over on the Asimov's forum, people are discussing an incident where a writer named Luke Jackson posted a rejection letter he received from William Sanders at Helix. The letter was originally posted on the blog of William Preston, who is defending the posting. Luke, however, has now apologized for the posting and Sanders has evidently accepted the apology.

I'm glad Luke Jackson has worked things out with William Sanders, but to everyone else saying editorial rejections are fair game for posting online, I'd like to add a few words: Are you crazy? Do you actually want to see your stories in print one day?

I have worked as an editor for a number of years, both at a commercial publishing house and at the online journal storySouth. The only reason I ever took the time to write a detailed rejection letter like the one Sanders wrote was if I thought the author had talent and I wanted to encourage that talent. If anyone had ever posted one of my rejection letters and then refused to apologize or remove the posting, I would have never considered any other submissions from that author. Period. And while I wouldn't have passed the word about the incident to other editors, if the letter attracted a lot of attention online you can bet other editors would have noticed and taken this into consideration come their own submission time.

It appears Luke Jackson made an honest mistake and has worked things out with his editor. But for all those crying defiance over this issue, pledging to post their own rejection letters for the world to critique, don't say you haven't been warned.

UPDATE: Someone e-mailed asking about my thoughts on the content of William Sanders' rejection letter. Just FYI, I focused this musing on the issue of posting an editor's rejection letter on the internet because I wasn't initially aware of what was in the letter. Once I read his letter, all I can say is that Tobias Buckell sums up my feelings very well on the matter. I've also posted more of my thoughts on all this here.

The book reviewer revolt against PDFs

Book reviewer Jonathan Strahan, who also edits a number of anthologies including two yearly "best of" science fiction and fantasy collections, writes that he is tired of receiving PDFs of novels and stories and being expected to absorb the said printing costs. As he states, "PDFs are, no matter what anyone says, designed to be printed." Strahan then estimates that printing off a PDF of one 500 page novel "means about $6.00 worth of paper and about $20.00 worth of printingcosts. Call it $25.00. That’s close to what the final book will cost to buy, once it’s been published. I can justify that cost from time to time, but not day after day." As a result, Strahan is considering restricting his reading for his year’s best anthologies to printed copies only.

It's a shame Strahan has to consider such a ban, but it's an understandable reaction to an equally  understandable trend. I review books for several places and while I'm nowhere near as big a name as Strahan, I also receive PDFs of upcoming novels. I understand that this delivery method is both faster and cheaper for publishers, authors, and promoters--which is obviously why they prefer it to mailing advance copies of books. But people need to be careful not to make sending PDFs instead of printed copies the norm; likewise, always query first to see if the person wants to receive a PDF of a massive novel. Otherwise, more reviewers will institute bans like the one Strahan is considering.

Science fiction and fantasy manuscript submission guidelines

This weekend I gave feedback to a friend on his novel submission packet. While I don't believe submissions must follow a rigid set of manuscript rules or always risk instant rejection, authors should generally stick to the basic formatting guidelines so editors can focus on what really matters--your story--instead of that crazy font you printed your story in.

For my money, the best online resource for proper manuscript guidelines comes from William Shunn. He presents the formatting guidelines in an extremely visual way as actual short story, poetry, or novel submissions. New writers would to well to study up on these examples.