skzbrust: The Myth of the Slush Pile

skzbrust (

skzbrust) wrote,
@ 2006-12-04 06:39:00

The Myth of the Slush Pile
I think the writing myth that is most destructive to new writers is the one that goes something like, "They don't actually read the stuff in the slush pile; I have to find a way to get past it in order to get published."

Consider this for a minute: There are many things an editor does with his day. Many of them, I have no doubt, are irritating, dull, and feel pointless (the inevitable conversation with the writer who hates his cover, lunch with the one guy in sales you just can't stand, &c). Some of them, I expect, are satisfying and pleasant (learning that production has really nailed the look for that book you're excited about, writing a real good piece of back cover copy, &c).

But the kicker, the real thrill, is finding and developing a new writer no one has ever heard of who will, either right now or with some work, set the sf world on its ear. And just where do you imagine they find a new writer no one has ever heard of?

Of course most of slush gets sent back after a cursory glance; most manuscripts they see can be safely rejected with a cursory glance. If the first sentence is, "cosmo flexsed his mity thews and lifted his gratesword's into the air of nefteron thinking of all the womin he wuld have after defeeting the evil tyrant glog and sacking the town in revenge for the deth of his famly when he was a small child in the wilderness," then a trained professional is able to determine that this fellow is not quite ready to hit the stands.

But if a quick glance is not enough to determine the story is junk, guess what? It gets more than a quick glance. Finding something good in slush, discovering that gem (or, perhaps even better, something that can become a gem with some work), is what those weirdoes live for. Well, that and making a really perfect one-line smack-down to a writer who's starting to get cocky.

Send it out. Keep sending it out. Ignore all the bullshit tricks for getting past the slushpile. If it's good, someone will buy it.

(Post a new comment)

mouseferatu
2006-12-04 06:49 am UTC (link)

Thank you for this.

My fiction efforts are currently on hold, due to my work in role-playing games, but I've submitted a great many novels and short stories in the past, and intend to do so again in the future. I have, indeed, viewed the very concept of the slush pile with something akin to dread. While I'm not going to pretend that one LJ post has changed my viewpoint to sunshine and roses, it's definitely nice to have an opposing perspective, from a source I trust, to think about.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

	heh fredcritter 2006-12-05 02:22 am UTC (link)
	Just needed to say I love your LJ username. Very clever. (Reply to this) (Parent)

	fredcritter 2006-12-04 06:55 am UTC (link)
	Were truer words ever written? I expect more than a few people will point others here to read this. Was there a specific reason you posted this or was it just, you know, time to do so? Not that it matters really—just curious. (Reply to this) (Thread)

	skzbrust 2006-12-04 06:59 am UTC (link)
	The latest thread on Making Light pushed a button. (Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

(Reply from suspended user)

	rocza 2006-12-04 07:11 am UTC (link)
	Thanks. I write for me, but lately have found I write a lot for me (it's a break from the academic writing, which is decidedly not for me), and have started to realize that eventually and soon, I'm going to have a finished "for me". That slush wouldn't be insta-death why even bother wasting the postage is good to keep in mind. (Reply to this)

	anjylle 2006-12-04 07:54 am UTC (link)
	^_^ I know a professional copyeditor who said that if the document is word-processed and spell-checked -- rather than written on scraps of paper/napkins/beer mats and accompanied by the line, 'these aren't my best parts!' -- it's already in the top 5% of the mythical pile. (Reply to this) (Thread)

	casacorona 2006-12-04 01:24 pm UTC (link)
	a. It's not mythical, it's a real pile. And b. your friend the copyeditor is correct. But c., Steve's excellent example of slush would probably have been run through a spell-checker. It would still suck. (Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

	anjylle 2006-12-04 05:38 pm UTC (link)
	points to smileyface emote I was agreeing with Steve. When you hang around in pubs with the Writer's Bloc folk, you learn all about that stuff. And develop a sense of subtle humour ;) (Reply to this) (Parent)

	aelburr 2006-12-04 11:18 am UTC (link)
	Every editor I've ever met (no, probably not enough to constitute a sample in the scientific sense) was a compulsive reader. If it had words, they would read it. I think that obsession is a big part of how they end up with the job. Everything I've heard or read by authors regarding this topic mirrors what you are saying. The only real trick is to keep trying. (Reply to this) (Thread)

	aelburr 2006-12-04 11:44 am UTC (link)
	BTW, I hear Venezuela is nice this time of year... (Reply to this) (Parent)

	cakmpls 2006-12-04 01:54 pm UTC (link)
	Of course, one could produce the corollary that if no one buys it, it's not good. Neither your original line nor mine is universally true, but I think that exactly the wrong people tend to believe each of them. (Reply to this) (Thread)

	skzbrust 2006-12-04 05:17 pm UTC (link)
	Well put indeed. (Reply to this) (Parent)

	lollardfish 2006-12-04 01:56 pm UTC (link)
	If you start a published work with the line: "cosmo flexsed his mity thews and lifted his gratesword's into the air of nefteron thinking of all the womin he wuld have after defeeting the evil tyrant glog and sacking the town in revenge for the deth of his famly when he was a small child in the wilderness," I will pay up to 4.72 for it. This, I promise. (Reply to this)

andrewfeland
2006-12-04 02:13 pm UTC (link)

I dunno, I see the beginnings of a fun story there...

"Cosmo flexsed his mity thews and lifted his gratesword's into the air of nefteron thinking of all the womin he wuld have after defeeting the evil tyrant glog and sacking the town in revenge for the deth of his famly when he was a small child in the wilderness."

The editor threw the manuscript into the fire crackling merrily on his hearth with enough force to send sparks flying into the rest of the slush pile, prompting some hasty work with a moist towel and a fire extinguisher. He settled back into his chair with another entry when he heard a knock at the door.

"Who in the world can that be?" he muttered to himself, rising with some effort from his all-too-comfortable chair.

etc.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

	sclerotic_rings 2006-12-04 03:14 pm UTC (link)
	And now you know how International Slushpile Bonfire Day got started. (Reply to this) (Parent)

ffoeg
2006-12-04 02:33 pm UTC (link)

Yes, but.

It's not just the chance of getting published, it's also the time. I know someone who was successfully pulled out of the slushpile by an editor that you know very well... after more than two years. It was good enough -- in fact it's really quite good and will make a splash this spring, I predict -- to get out, but that was a long, hard, cold, quiet wait.

I don't say it's the right thing, but I can certainly understand the appeal that shortcuts offer.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

	jimhines 2006-12-04 02:54 pm UTC (link)
	2.5 years for me. (For a deal that fell apart, but that's another story.) Getting an agent can speed things up a lot with publishers, but you still have to submit to the agent's slush pile. Six of one, half a dozen of the other... (Reply to this) (Parent)

	skzbrust 2006-12-04 05:20 pm UTC (link)
	No argument. If you can short-curcuit the slush pile, it will save you time. But the misconception is that it will make the difference between a sale and no-sale, and this is highly unlikely, and a harmful idea. (Reply to this) (Parent)

	penmage 2006-12-04 02:52 pm UTC (link)
	Is true. When I was an intern for Aladdin paperbacks, I was the slush pile reader. Most of the stuff was not great, but when something sparked my interest, I always gave it a second look. Turns out that the one manuscript I pulled out of the slush pile and passed up to the editors was something that got resubmitted with an agent. (Reply to this)

	howardbrazee 2006-12-04 03:31 pm UTC (link)
	It would be interesting to know just how bad something can be, but still get the editor's attention that it might be worthwhile to encourage the author. I suppose bad, without some redeming feature wouldn't need to be very bad. (Reply to this)

	chadu 2006-12-04 03:44 pm UTC (link)
	Thanks for posting this, Steve. I've just begun applying ass to chair with the end of hammering out some fiction and scripts, and seeing this post firms my resolve. CU (Reply to this)

coolmajaka
2006-12-04 05:17 pm UTC (link)

Howdy All,

As a slushmonkey at

thetowndrunk, I'll mention the extremely strong relation between properly formatted manuscripts and the chance of advancing to the next level. Not because formatting is the most important thing about subbing, but it _is_ the first impression you make on a slusher, and that's important, because...

We Don't Want To Reject You -- But We Will Out of Self Defense!

Might sound odd, but when you start to appreciate the number of subs we receive (and were pretty new and pay a "token" and still the numbers increase), you begin to understand the importance of sending your best stuff, and properly formatted at that. It's als just a simple matter of professionalism -- looks do count (ask the guy who interviewed for the executive job while wearing holey jeans and old tennis shoes how _he_ did).

Usually the first three pages (and their particular formating) will reveal whether a story is worth reading through, or, at least skipping to the end. Often times it will reveal the author spent zero time examining our guidleines and have sent us something completely innappropriate.

But...and this is important...it is a true thrill to find something I can forward to the editor with praise.

So tighten thos words, be profesional, learn to love the sting of rejection (oh, and I write as well, so I know the feelin' first hand), and ignore anyone who offer quick fixes for selling your work. There are none -- just dogged perserverance and a fondness for banging on a keyboard.

(Reply to this)

	hlglne 2006-12-04 06:52 pm UTC (link)
	http://www.aphroditesapples.com/submissions.htm send us your erotic romance slush! please! we are new e-publishers, and get bored...you might make dollars a year. (Reply to this)

	danceswthcobras 2006-12-04 07:01 pm UTC (link)
	Three words: Eye Of Argon. http://www.dcs.gla.ac.uk/SF-Archives/Misc/eyeargon.html (Reply to this) (Thread)

	sclerotic_rings 2006-12-05 02:44 am UTC (link)
	Two more words: Squashed Armadillocon. (Reply to this) (Parent)

	rgriff 2006-12-09 07:05 am UTC (link)
	Oh man. That thing is beautiful. (Reply to this) (Parent)

minnehaha
2006-12-04 07:31 pm UTC (link)

Out of a thousand unsolicited manuscripts, how many can be rejected with a cursory glance and a form letter? How many are that nugget of gold that lights up the editor's day? And how many are in that difficult and time-consuming category of, "nearly good enough; I want to cultivate this author, but I'm not yet ready to publish them?"

K. [doesn't have any idea, nor do I know how many unsolicited manuscript a publisher expects to have in hand at any time]

(Reply to this) (Thread)

	skzbrust 2006-12-04 07:50 pm UTC (link)
	Best answer to that is here:http://nielsenhayden.com/makinglight/archives/004641.html (Reply to this) (Parent)

joelrosenberg
2006-12-04 09:43 pm UTC (link)

Baby writers tend to analyze -- and analyze, and analyze -- the meaning of rejections and/or delays.

Really, they mean just about nothing. The form rejection letter means "I'm not buying this thing," and that's all; the personalized rejectin letter means "I either ran out of forms or I wanted to give you a little personal attention -- but I'm still not buying this thing," and that's all. A wait of a week, a month, a year, five years, means, "I haven't gotten around to your thing yet, or it's been lost."

And that's all.

(Reply to this)

	dd_b 2006-12-04 10:11 pm UTC (link)
	And, by the way, the frequent harping on format, spelling, and such issues is not, primarily, a sign that editors are insanely anal; what it really is is the evidence that a great many of the manuscripts submitted are totally and utterly hopeless -- prepared by people who haven't done the most basic research about how to submit a manuscript. (Reply to this)

	zizban 2006-12-05 02:45 am UTC (link)
	I read somewhere one of the nielsen-haydens will sometimes read from the slush pile, but only the first few pages and if it sparks their interest they'll read forty more before deciding. (Reply to this) (Thread)

lenora_rose
2006-12-06 04:52 am UTC (link)

Both Nielsen Haydens (No hyphen!) have read slush (Patrick, as chief editor, seems to get away without doing it more), but the impression i've had from what they say is that in *every case* they read as far as holds their interest. Be that two sentences or the whole thing on hand.

Most slush submissions are the first three chapters (Most places that say 3 chapters add a caveat, "or the first 50 pages"). If they've read "a few pages" plus 40 pages, they've probably read the whole initial submission.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

tnh
2007-01-28 11:17 pm UTC (link)

I read as long as it takes me to get a sense of the book. Opening chapters are often anomalous, so if the first page is awful, I flip forward to see whether the book is still that bad a couple of chapters in.

You want to know what the process is like? Stop thinking like an author. Think like a reader instead. Stand in front of the wire racks or bookstore shelves, pick up a book, and see how long it takes you to decide it's not for you -- or to get interested and want to read further.

Steve, that example of yours wasn't bad enough. The bits of incluing were in logical order, and stuff was happening. For a truly representative bad book, you need to start with two and a half chapters of aimless shilly-shallying before anything significant or irrevocable happens.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

thedragonweaver
2006-12-05 03:19 am UTC (link)

This sounds exactly like the resume pile— I have spoken with several people who have screened resumes and they all say that they look at all of them, but the ones that take more than a cursory glance are evident from the start.

Rather frighteningly, one of those people is my current boss— and the turnaround time from resume submission to interview request was something like ten hours. I say frightening because it is quite possible that the only distinguishing features of my resume (as opposed to the dozens rejected in the same time period) were its correct spelling and grammar.

So in other words, submitting a book is very similar to applying for a job. You have to do it the right way— submit it to the right place, format it rightly, and display a knowledge of language— and you can't know until you've done it if you will succeed.

And rejection at one place may only mean that it was not the right fit. Keep trying.

Actually, it occurs to me that success at first try might be more damaging than failure. I know that my first post-collegiate job was quite easily obtained— and my next one was after a long slog of discouragement and ramen. If you have the ramen slog first, it might be easier in the long run.

(Reply to this)

	angrymonkey 2006-12-05 04:07 am UTC (link)
	Thanks dude. I really needed that. (Reply to this)

minnehaha
2006-12-05 12:39 pm UTC (link)

"Of course most of slush gets sent back after a cursory glance; most manuscripts they see can be safely rejected with a cursory glance. If the first sentence is, 'cosmo flexsed his mity thews and lifted his gratesword's into the air of nefteron thinking of all the womin he wuld have after defeeting the evil tyrant glog and sacking the town in revenge for the deth of his famly when he was a small child in the wilderness,' then a trained professional is able to determine that this fellow is not quite ready to hit the stands."

Nonsense. I quick turn through a copyeditor, and he could be the next Terry Brooks.

B

(Reply to this) (Thread)

	archschnitz 2006-12-05 04:44 pm UTC (link)
	Nah, that's Robert-Jordan-Level work if I've ever seen it. You know, add some twisting of braids and upbraiding of the opposite gender... (Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

	zizban 2006-12-05 05:13 pm UTC (link)
	Don't forget smoothing of dresses and sniffing. (Reply to this) (Parent)

	raaven 2006-12-05 08:30 pm UTC (link)
	That's very encouraging; thank you. (Reply to this)

	gaaneden 2006-12-06 05:50 am UTC (link)
	This is very true. As the Editor of The Edge of Propinquity, I have found a couple of real gems in my slushpile. In fact, I'm pleased to be able to publish one of them, Jeff Parish, in the December issue of TEoP. He's got talent and it shows. He's one of only eight guest authors I am publishing this year and his story is going to stand up with James M. Ward this month. (Reply to this)

Username:		Create an Account Forgot your login? Login w/ OpenID
Password:
	Remember Me
	English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…

About

Help

Get Involved

Legal

Store

LJ Labs