Re: CHAT: Conlang and Writers

Hi all, I'm sort of just replying to this thread in general...

Sally Caves wrote:

>   I really like your pages, Matthew.  They are
> precise,they are beautifully presented with that contrasting blue and yellow, and
> you seem to
> be onto some interesting developments; give me a chance to look at it again more
> closely, and maybe I can suggest some alternate terminology for what you're
> describing.
> But I'm only an amateur linguist, and I've benefited greatly from the wisdom on
> the list.
> Been here a year now!
Thanks for the kind words, and suggestions are always welcome. (that's why
I'm here : ) [that means I'm *looking* for criticism you guys!]

Laurie Gerholz wrote:

> 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.
This was the original impression I was under.  I did a lot of research
before I actually started sending out manuscripts and I definitely came
away with the implicit understanding that "sim subbing" could get
me blackballed.

It's pretty obvious how petty that is though.  The "situation" that
publishers don't want to mess with is one where they are not in
complete control.  In most other areas of life (such as job hunting)
people are free to market themselves, or their work, to a broad
base so that they can sell to the highest bidder. (that is the hallmark
of capitalism, isn't it?) In publishing, writers are bullied into putting
all of their eggs in one basket and just taking whatever they're given.
After finding out how little markets pay for literature, I gave up on
the idea of writing for a living.  Keeping my "day job,"
I can afford the luxury of being an "artiste" ;-)  I noticed that the
more I thought about "marketability" the weaker my writing
got.

I'm still going to market my material, but I'm don't have any
great expectations.  I'm free to self publish <gasp> on the web.
Given that The Argo is so long and it is my first novel I'm considering
just "giving" it away to the public and then focusing on the material
that I think is more marketable (i.e., my other novel and my short
stories).

Besides, there are a lot of things that a writer can do in HTML that
we can't on paper.  It's so much more convenient to have words from
conlangs linked to a glossary (instead of having to flip back and
forth on paper).  It's kinder to trees to publish electronically (every time
I send out a MS I suffer pangs of guilt, and the publishing industry
reacts violently against anything that minimized the wasting of paper!
Their lives *would* be easier if they took electronic submissions
but they're so archaic.) and an electronic format encourages more
intimacy between reader and writer.

Oh well, I'm surely blackballed now.  The publishing mafia will
probably show up on my doorstep with tommyguns ;-)  The
thought police will come, erase this post and then give
all of you who have read it EST to make you forget that I
ever existed.  I'd better flee the country under an assumed
name...

BTW, I've always wanted to read A Handmaid's Tale.  I've seen
parts of the movie-- chilling!  I owe it to myself to read the book!