Five Ways
Subscribe to my newsletter and get a free story!
Share this:

Some Slushpile Thoughts

Picture of books stacked in a hallwayIn reading for Women Destroy Fantasy, I’ve cleared about two hundred stories away so far, and there’s still about a hundred I have yet to read. Some amazing stuff, some familiar names, and all in all, a slush pile that is full enough of solid stories that I could fill several issues. It’s been a great pleasure to be elbow deep in so much excellence. So here’s a few notes on the experience so far.

In my head, I have these slots:

  1. My fairytale/legend/historical slot: Right now there’s a very good historical piece that I’ve tentatively penciled in here. It hits a lot of my sweet spots as a reader, it’s an interesting magic system, and it’s a good story. We’ll see if anything comes along that knocks it out of that slot.
  2. My steampunk/Victorian slot: Plenty of these stories to choose from, and again there’s a particular one in the lead.
  3. My superhero slot: A good number of these, and they are all jostling for the slot. I don’t have a favorite yet.
  4. My urban/modern day fantasy slot: Another one with multiple contenders so far, and there’s a number of wild and weird ones.

My criteria? I want good stories that will stick in the reader’s head and keep them thinking long after they’re done reading. I want lovely prose — but not so lovely that it eclipses the story. I want heart — I’m still looking for a story in the pile that makes me cry.

Other observations:

  • It’s a good idea to think about the impetus behind the anthology. Things like an anti-feminist message are probably going to be an awfully hard sell for an issue with what I’d consider a feminist theme.
  • Lots of wings in this slushpile. Not saying that’s bad, but man are there a lot of stories with this focus.
  • A lot has been done with fairytales in the past. Looking for fresher ground might be more rewarding.

4 Responses

  1. I’ve heard other anthologists in the past talk about organizing in this fashion–x number of stories in each of several categories–and it almost always sets off my personal justice alarm. Your comment about the urban fantasy slot set it off again. So, in the urban/contemporary fantasy realm, you have several contenders, and it sounds like you even have a good range of stories (“a number of wild and weird ones”). So, what happens if you have a slot you’d to fill with a steampunk story, but the steampunks you have left are all just mediocre compared to the cluster of urban tales. Do you pass on brilliance in order to fill a category?

    I realize my rhetoric in that first ‘graph is a bit slanted–perhaps even hyperbolic–but seriously, what are your determining factors? I understand that, having advertised that you would cover a range of subgenres, you are obligated to include at least one story in each subgenre you’ve advertised, but I didn’t get the impression you were publishing only one story in each subgenre. So what are the governing rules? If you have set aside four slots for steampunk/Victorian do you fill all four slots with that subgenre, regardless of individual story quality? Even if all the stories in that category are–say–sixes (on a 1 to 11 scale–we always have to go to eleven) and you have a surfeit of diverse nines in another category?

    I’m sure you have a system to cover all these contingencies, Cat. I’m just curious how it works. Thanks.

    1. Hi Dennis –

      That’s a great question. Fortunately for me, it’s not a case of passing on brilliance in order to fill a quota. There’s a ton of good stuff in every category and those categories are also entirely self-imposed and somewhat malleable. I’d like to have a good urban fantasy, for example, but if I haven’t hit one with enough wow to it, I’ll use something else.

      At the same time, even if I had four great steampunk stories, I’d still be picking just one, because I’m thinking of the issue itself as an entity, and part of its identity is showing a range of fantasy, not just one genre. Part of the trick of editing is that you’re thinking along the lines of creating a whole that is greater than the sum of the parts, using stories that inform or speak to each other. And that requires stories that differ from each other in various ways.

      This is the sad thing about being an editor. Sometimes — perhaps even often — you can love a story and not be able to use it. I hit a story yesterday in the slush that I knew wouldn’t work — but I read it all the way through because it was a great story. But it’s not right for this issue.

      All in all, though, this is something that is true of rejections; often they are not about a story’s quality. They may be due to the fact that the publication recently ran a similar story or even that the story doesn’t quite match the editor’s sense of their magazine. That’s one reason I suggest writers spend a stint reading slush, so they get a feel for it.

  2. Interesting and scary comments! (As a writer, trying to see if your story 1: falls into any of the above categories, 2: has legs enough to overcome competition.)

    On a weird side note: I always thought Steampunk was more sci-fi with the technology? I’m not a steampunk reader, though, so if there are fantasy elements there, I’m interested to see them in play.

    What about straight up high fantasy? Home-grown world, medieval/ancient world/eastern faux world? Or would that be considered “historical fantasy?”

  3. Cat, I think it would be worthwhile to write a blog post about your experience in reading for WDSF versus reading for Fantasy in general. I’m curious if an all-female slush pile “feels” different or if there are themes that simply disappeared from the slush and thus seem to be only broached by men. That kind of thing. Just an idea!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Get Fiction in Your Mailbox Each Month

Want access to a lively community of writers and readers, free writing classes, co-working sessions, special speakers, weekly writing games, random pictures and MORE for as little as $2? Check out Cat’s Patreon campaign.

Want to get some new fiction? Support my Patreon campaign.
Want to get some new fiction? Support my Patreon campaign.

 

"(On the writing F&SF workshop) Wanted to crow and say thanks: the first story I wrote after taking your class was my very first sale. Coincidence? nah….thanks so much."

~K. Richardson

You may also like...

Announcing The Reinvented Detective!

I’m pleased to announce that we have final cover, release date, and table of contents!

December 12, 2023, The Reinvented Detective, the second installment of the Reinvented Anthology series from Jennifer Brozek and Cat Rambo, appears from Arc Manor.

The evolution of crime, punishment, and justice in the future.

What happens when time and technology change the definition of crime and punishment?

Science fiction often focuses on future technology without considering the society housing it. Social norms may change as tech changes — or not. What will criminals, investigators, judges, and juries look like in a complicated future of clones, uploaded intelligences, artificial brains, or body augmentation? What stories emerge when we acknowledge the possibilities of new laws, new police methods, and the birth of sentient Artificial Intelligence, as well as all the ways they can clash or combine?

The Reinvented Detective presents stories that complicate law and order as well as the concept of criminals, detectives, punishment, and justice for all by showing how shifting technology, the rise of sentient AIs, and shifting social attitudes may affect what is not only acceptable, but expected, within both real world and digital communities—and everything in-between. These stories reinvent detective and true crime tropes, recasting them for the 21st century, and above all, experimenting, astonishing, and entertaining.

Table of Contents

Foreword – Jennifer Brozek

REPORTS
Poem: That Missing C: Police Report #1 – Jane Yolen
The Best Justice Money Can Buy – C.C. Finlay
The Gardener’s Mystery: Notes from a Journal – Lisa Morton
Someone Else’s Device – AnaMaria Curtis
Coded Out – Frog and Esther Jones
Murder at the Westminster Dino Show – Rosemary Claire Smith
The Unassembled Victims – Peter Clines

ARTIFACTS
Poem: Ghosts – Seanan McGuire
Agents Provocateur – Lazarus Black
Great Detective in a Box – Jennifer R. Povey
Color Me Dead – E. J. Delaney
The Unremembered Paradox – Maurice Broaddus and Bethany K. Warner
Go Ask A.L.I.C.E. – Lyda Morehouse
Request to Vanish – Lauren Ring
Overclocked Holmes – Sarah Day and Tim Pratt

JUDGMENTS
Poem: Final Judgement – Jane Yolen
Dead Witness – Marie Bilodeau
We Are All Ourselves Inside Our Skins – Sam Fleming
Inside, Outside, Above, Below – Premee Mohamed
To Every Seed Their Own Body – Guan Un
In the Shadow of the Great Days – Harry Turtledove
Gum5hoe – Carrie Harris

Afterword – Cat Rambo

Buy from Amazon
Buy from Barnes & Noble
Buy from Powells Books

...

What I'm Telling the Slush Readers for If This Goes On

negative-space-woman-reading-philosophy-book-thought-catalogA week or so ago we had the orientation session for the slush readers. I gathered them by posting announcements in my newsletter and other social media, but I also tried to reach out to a range of people in order to ask for recommendations in order to ensure I had a diverse pool. We ended up with over a dozen slushreaders, and one of the things I want all of them to take away from the experience is better understanding of stories and how to sort through things.

We video-recorded the session, and the publisher went over the mechanics of the slush system in that as well. Parvus Press has mentioned recently that I asked to have the slush read blind, which to me seems like a better approach. Studies have shown that perception of the attached name can change the way someone reacts to a scholarly paper, and I’m reasonably sure similar things happen when reading fiction.

One of the things I’ve stressed is that typos and grammatical errors aren’t a dealbreaker – we can fix those. A compelling story with some issues like that is something I want to see. But the world’s most immaculately formatted story won’t do much for me unless there’s a good story attached, by which I mean a story that entertains while at the same informs or engages or makes you think or hopefully some combination of all of that. Look for the stories that startle and amaze you, I told them. Or really piss you off, I added, because sometimes that’s the sign of a good story.

If the story is from a viewpoint radically different than their own, I’d like them to make sure some other eyes check it out. (Nonetheless I’m going to be a pain in the rear and read everything, partly because I want to be able to talk to the slushreaders about stuff as it comes up.)

I emphasized a policy that I have borrowed from John Joseph Adams, who has edited a kerjillion anthologies, and asked people not to talk about the slushreading experience in anything but vague and enthusiastic terms. I know writers will be watching those utterances and often taking stuff to heart that was not intended for them. In my early years, I had the odd experience of having an IGMS slushreader blog about my story submission in mocking terms. This probably would have been more discouraging if the actual editor hadn’t just bought the story, but I will always remember reading through their account of the slushreading party and the lines about all of them laughing about hitting a story written from an elephant’s POV. The vividness of that moment is not something I really want the slushreaders inflicting on other writers.

We closed up by talking a little about how to stay un-depressed in the light of what may well turn out to be a whole bunch of grim stories. It’s okay to step away from the keyboard sometimes, and we have enough slushreaders that plenty of eyes will be looking at the stories.

...

Skip to content