Ann, I agree with nearly all of this. Most of the time, credits on the letter don't make any difference. And absolutely, you should aim as high as you can to start with. ("High" = "Markets that publish work you admire.")
I would push back a little, though, on the (implied, probably unintentional) notion that the quality of writing is a linear scale, i.e., "Just write better." Sure, the mechanics are linear: either your grammar is secure or it isn't. But flavor of the imagination, the type of character people like to see in a given situation, the amount of surprise vs. predictability in the plot, "plausibility" of the premise, type and variety of language, voicing choices, etc. -- these are heavily subjective. Thus a writer may receive, as I have received, a rejection letter full of praise from Pro Market X for the same story that got a form-letter ding from Pro Market Y, and exactly the reverse for the next story.
Consequently, much as a slush reader might be sympatico with the EIC, there are bound to be places where the first 350 words just don't resonate sufficiently with the slush reader to make him/her turn the page, but might so resonate with the editor. (I hear you, I hear you, about John & Gordon etc. But it can't be a 1.0 correlation or even a 0.8 correlation; it just can't.) Thus, having an external reason for the slush reader to turn that second page ("I graduated from Clarion", "I published in XYZ mag," etc.) is a good thing, because maybe, when s/he gets to the third page, s/he'll be hooked. Natch, somebody like Mike Resnick will see such a credit and snort derisively, unless it mentions a Hugo Award. But not everyone.
For example: Duotrope says that F&SF accepts roughly one out of every 400 submissions, and that's probably optimistic. Of those rejections, probably 80% or more never get past the slush readers. Further, F&SF publishes 95% of its stories from established writers. What this means, inevitably, is that solid stories by strong writers are going to get slush rejections. Anything that can better the odds, it seems to me, is a plus.
Nothing in this comment contradicts anything you have said, or I don't think so. But the fact is that most new writers, even new superb writers, are going to experience dozens, maybe hundreds of dings at the Analog-Asimovs-F&SF-SH-Fantasy-Clarkesworld-Interzone level, and "aiming" for them is realistically a matter of "A man's reach should exceed his grasp, or what's Heaven for?" Of course, I do exactly that -- but I do it with the expectation of being rejected, and so I get all excited when I get even one of those praiseful letters, and I fell out of my chair Friday when I got an acceptance. Otherwise, if I had anything resembling expectation, I would have been discouraged long ago.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2009-12-07 10:35 pm (UTC)I would push back a little, though, on the (implied, probably unintentional) notion that the quality of writing is a linear scale, i.e., "Just write better." Sure, the mechanics are linear: either your grammar is secure or it isn't. But flavor of the imagination, the type of character people like to see in a given situation, the amount of surprise vs. predictability in the plot, "plausibility" of the premise, type and variety of language, voicing choices, etc. -- these are heavily subjective. Thus a writer may receive, as I have received, a rejection letter full of praise from Pro Market X for the same story that got a form-letter ding from Pro Market Y, and exactly the reverse for the next story.
Consequently, much as a slush reader might be sympatico with the EIC, there are bound to be places where the first 350 words just don't resonate sufficiently with the slush reader to make him/her turn the page, but might so resonate with the editor. (I hear you, I hear you, about John & Gordon etc. But it can't be a 1.0 correlation or even a 0.8 correlation; it just can't.) Thus, having an external reason for the slush reader to turn that second page ("I graduated from Clarion", "I published in XYZ mag," etc.) is a good thing, because maybe, when s/he gets to the third page, s/he'll be hooked. Natch, somebody like Mike Resnick will see such a credit and snort derisively, unless it mentions a Hugo Award. But not everyone.
For example: Duotrope says that F&SF accepts roughly one out of every 400 submissions, and that's probably optimistic. Of those rejections, probably 80% or more never get past the slush readers. Further, F&SF publishes 95% of its stories from established writers. What this means, inevitably, is that solid stories by strong writers are going to get slush rejections. Anything that can better the odds, it seems to me, is a plus.
Nothing in this comment contradicts anything you have said, or I don't think so. But the fact is that most new writers, even new superb writers, are going to experience dozens, maybe hundreds of dings at the Analog-Asimovs-F&SF-SH-Fantasy-Clarkesworld-Interzone level, and "aiming" for them is realistically a matter of "A man's reach should exceed his grasp, or what's Heaven for?" Of course, I do exactly that -- but I do it with the expectation of being rejected, and so I get all excited when I get even one of those praiseful letters, and I fell out of my chair Friday when I got an acceptance. Otherwise, if I had anything resembling expectation, I would have been discouraged long ago.