Re: CHAT: Conlang and Writers

I just have to throw in some thoughts to confuse the issue. Please keep
in mind that this advice comes from a published author of my
acquaintance, but we had this discussion many years ago. Perhaps the
market and the rules have changed.

Sally Caves wrote:
>
> Mathew Willoughby wrote:
>
> > this particular publisher didn't want sample chapters, they wanted the
> > entire book and an agreement that I not engage in the heretical
> > practice of "simultaneous submission."  Normally publishers look at sample
> > chapters as an initial screening process but this one was different.  So,
> > like a good little soldier, I wrote short stories while I waited eight months
> > to finally get my rejection  letter.  Boy was I happy!  I said,  "Woo hoo!
> > Now I can finally send this MS off to someone else!"
>
> Here is my sound advice, given me by a respected agent.  Ignore the prohibitions
> against "simultaneous submission."  That's the only thing you've got as a writer.
I don't necessarily believe that's the only thing you've got. See below.

> The market is cruelly tilted in favor of the publisher, and they make these
> rules.  Obviously, writers are simultaneously submitting all over the place out of
> desperate need... otherwise this press wouldn't have asked you not to.
I won't argue the "cruelty" of the market. It sounds brutal from
everything I've heard. But my author also told me that publishers don't
want to mess with the situation when a given manuscript has been
*accepted* at multiple places. It may be true that "everyone does it"
when it comes to simultaneous submissions. But it you're caught -- well,
publishers talk to each other. The field actually sounds pretty
incestuous. A known simultaneous submitter may be seen as less
trustworthy by the publishers.

> Eight
> months?  I'm waiting on Tor for over a year.  Some people can wait as much as two
> years for a press to get back to them.  This is often the case with short
> stories.  So we
> are supposed to send one short story out every two years?
This is insane, and my author says don't put up with it. If a publisher
doesn't get back to you within a reasonable time frame (six months? a
year? can't remember what he said), write to them and tell them you are
withdrawing the submission. Then it is yours again to freely submit
elsewhere, and protects you legally.

> Read my lips and submit
> simultaneously.  That way you have a bargaining chip if you're good.  If any press
> makes that demand again, on condition that they'll read the manuscript, say that
> you'll comply with it only if they agree to read it within one month.   They can
> only say no, and you send it somewhere else.
My author's strategy is to have multiple pieces in the works, and
multiple pieces in the pipe. Don't wait for a submission to come back
before doing the next piece. Start the next one right away, and send
that off somewhere else. And then the next one. Then when the first one
comes back, if it's rejected, send *it* somewhere else.

>
> Another tip:  don't let anybody talk you into paying them for editorial advice up
> front.
>
Agreed. This also correlates with what my author said.

Now, you probably want to listen to Sally's current (and professional)
advice rather than my old (and second-hand) advice. But keep us up to
date on what happens.

And have you looked into publishing-on-demand? Yes, we're talking
potentially small print runs here. But because the publisher isn't
taking nearly as much of a chance on any given piece, they might be more
open to working with new people rather than just established writers.

Laurie
milo@winternet.com
http://www.winternet.com/~milo