I’ve had the pleasure to work with or receive criticism from a number of wonderful people. Lyn Perry of Residential Aliens, for example, is one of the most gracious people who has ever published one of my stories. In fact, when I was rather harsh about the stories in one of his issues last year, he didn’t react as you’d expect (getting in a huff over it). Instead, he was happy for the criticism, and offered up the next issue for my perusal. He and I are likely to disagree on all kinds of things (personally and religiously), but our relationship has, however brief, remained friendly.
I’ve had similar experiences with Bruce Bethke, who will be publishing one of my fantasy shorts this year (“In the Shadows of the Empire of Coal”), and Nick Mamatas, who ripped one of my stories a new one, but in a way that showed me what I had done wrong (in a way that was irrefutable). I’ve been fortunate to have these experiences, and the many others I don’t have the space to talk about here. The vast majority of editors are in that “nice people” bin.
But this post is about a bad experience. No names. No specifics beyond the event itself.
Some time ago, one of my friends pointed an editor with an anthology to fill in my direction. I
read the details, thought it sounded pretty nifty, and set to writing a story. There were a few hiccups on the way — personal issues and so on — and I spent a bit of time facetiously hyping up the story (I tend to do this with people I’m friendly with — “This is the best thing ever” and so on, though it almost always comes with a 😛 face; my friend thinks the story is brilliant, and I trust his opinion on almost anything. Plus, it got an honorable mention in a major award recently, so there’s that). I appreciated having the extra time and said as much. Eventually I got the story done and submitted it.
As with any submission, I expect a preliminary “acceptance” to come with the caveat of “w/ edits.” This is (usually) a normal process. Most of the time, the edits are minor. You need to trim this. You need to add a little emotion here. And so on. In this case, the edits were extensive. The story I’d written was a tad long, with a lot of attention paid to the world and the characters. So I went to work. I cut the beginning and sucked relevant details out and moved them down into the second half. I trimmed quite a bit from that story, to be honest, but there were some aspects of the edit requests that I didn’t understand. And if I don’t understand something, I have to ask about it. That’s what I did. I sent the new edit back and asked for clarification: “I don’t quite know what you mean by X. Could you give me an example?”
What follows is one of the most unusual experiences I’ve had in the writing world. The editor decided to do the edits themselves, along with their co-editor. I assumed this was their “deal,” and let them do it. A week or so later, I receive a heavily-edited story. The vast majority of the edits made sense. Trim some worldbuilding here. Trim some of this here. Get to the meat quicker. I accepted most of those. But then there were the edits I didn’t agree with. These edits required cutting a lot of character development in order to reduce the story into the theme, moving details where they didn’t make sense, or cutting details entirely, which you couldn’t remove without tossing the whole world out of wack. The crucial point, however, rested on whether to keep a secondary character’s motivations apparent (the editor wanted to cut that out; I wanted to keep it in, even if trimmed excessively, because otherwise that secondary character would be little more than a shell).
The editor and I argued about this until he finally said that unless I accepted all their edits (the implication being that the publisher would ask for more edits anyway, so why bother haggling?), they would not accept the story and would have to find another fill the anthology. Shortly after, they proceeded to tell me that I was one of the most difficult writers they had ever worked with: I had forced them to edit my story, refused to accept most of the edits, and had wasted their time, etc. It got worse. I was told that their other reader didn’t finish the story (why accept it, then?), that if another story came in, they would take it over mine (umm, ok), and, the icing on the cake, they denied that what actually happened (I asked for clarification in an email I still have in my inbox) didn’t happen because “that’s not how [they] recall it.”
The reality? I accepted 90% of the edits (or more), and wanted to rework other suggested changes so as to avoid losing important details. I never asked for this person to edit the story for me, nor refused to accept the majority of the edits. There is no evidence of that ever happening (I have almost all of the emails and tweets). This same person has since written their imaginary version of the experience (granted, without names). It is just that: an imaginary version of what actually happened. The facts don’t lie.
The result of this experience? I will never work with this person again. Ever. I’m sure they would rather not work with me either, but for reasons founded on a reality that never existed. And that’s fine. Because in the grand game of writing and publishing, there are a lot of people I’d rather work with anyway. People who I’ve already had the pleasure to work with. They’ll get my stories. Some of them will publish them. Some of them won’t. I’ll get rejections, calls for edits, and publications because I’ll keep at it, keep working on my writing with my friend, and keep pushing forward. But I did learn something important from all of this: not all editors are nice people.
Like this:
Like Loading...
Related
Not All Editors Are Nice People (or, Some People Live in Imaginary Universes)
Reading Time
I’ve had the pleasure to work with or receive criticism from a number of wonderful people. Lyn Perry of Residential Aliens, for example, is one of the most gracious people who has ever published one of my stories. In fact, when I was rather harsh about the stories in one of his issues last year, he didn’t react as you’d expect (getting in a huff over it). Instead, he was happy for the criticism, and offered up the next issue for my perusal. He and I are likely to disagree on all kinds of things (personally and religiously), but our relationship has, however brief, remained friendly.
I’ve had similar experiences with Bruce Bethke, who will be publishing one of my fantasy shorts this year (“In the Shadows of the Empire of Coal”), and Nick Mamatas, who ripped one of my stories a new one, but in a way that showed me what I had done wrong (in a way that was irrefutable). I’ve been fortunate to have these experiences, and the many others I don’t have the space to talk about here. The vast majority of editors are in that “nice people” bin.
But this post is about a bad experience. No names. No specifics beyond the event itself.
Some time ago, one of my friends pointed an editor with an anthology to fill in my direction. I
read the details, thought it sounded pretty nifty, and set to writing a story. There were a few hiccups on the way — personal issues and so on — and I spent a bit of time facetiously hyping up the story (I tend to do this with people I’m friendly with — “This is the best thing ever” and so on, though it almost always comes with a 😛 face; my friend thinks the story is brilliant, and I trust his opinion on almost anything. Plus, it got an honorable mention in a major award recently, so there’s that). I appreciated having the extra time and said as much. Eventually I got the story done and submitted it.
As with any submission, I expect a preliminary “acceptance” to come with the caveat of “w/ edits.” This is (usually) a normal process. Most of the time, the edits are minor. You need to trim this. You need to add a little emotion here. And so on. In this case, the edits were extensive. The story I’d written was a tad long, with a lot of attention paid to the world and the characters. So I went to work. I cut the beginning and sucked relevant details out and moved them down into the second half. I trimmed quite a bit from that story, to be honest, but there were some aspects of the edit requests that I didn’t understand. And if I don’t understand something, I have to ask about it. That’s what I did. I sent the new edit back and asked for clarification: “I don’t quite know what you mean by X. Could you give me an example?”
What follows is one of the most unusual experiences I’ve had in the writing world. The editor decided to do the edits themselves, along with their co-editor. I assumed this was their “deal,” and let them do it. A week or so later, I receive a heavily-edited story. The vast majority of the edits made sense. Trim some worldbuilding here. Trim some of this here. Get to the meat quicker. I accepted most of those. But then there were the edits I didn’t agree with. These edits required cutting a lot of character development in order to reduce the story into the theme, moving details where they didn’t make sense, or cutting details entirely, which you couldn’t remove without tossing the whole world out of wack. The crucial point, however, rested on whether to keep a secondary character’s motivations apparent (the editor wanted to cut that out; I wanted to keep it in, even if trimmed excessively, because otherwise that secondary character would be little more than a shell).
The editor and I argued about this until he finally said that unless I accepted all their edits (the implication being that the publisher would ask for more edits anyway, so why bother haggling?), they would not accept the story and would have to find another fill the anthology. Shortly after, they proceeded to tell me that I was one of the most difficult writers they had ever worked with: I had forced them to edit my story, refused to accept most of the edits, and had wasted their time, etc. It got worse. I was told that their other reader didn’t finish the story (why accept it, then?), that if another story came in, they would take it over mine (umm, ok), and, the icing on the cake, they denied that what actually happened (I asked for clarification in an email I still have in my inbox) didn’t happen because “that’s not how [they] recall it.”
The reality? I accepted 90% of the edits (or more), and wanted to rework other suggested changes so as to avoid losing important details. I never asked for this person to edit the story for me, nor refused to accept the majority of the edits. There is no evidence of that ever happening (I have almost all of the emails and tweets). This same person has since written their imaginary version of the experience (granted, without names). It is just that: an imaginary version of what actually happened. The facts don’t lie.
The result of this experience? I will never work with this person again. Ever. I’m sure they would rather not work with me either, but for reasons founded on a reality that never existed. And that’s fine. Because in the grand game of writing and publishing, there are a lot of people I’d rather work with anyway. People who I’ve already had the pleasure to work with. They’ll get my stories. Some of them will publish them. Some of them won’t. I’ll get rejections, calls for edits, and publications because I’ll keep at it, keep working on my writing with my friend, and keep pushing forward. But I did learn something important from all of this: not all editors are nice people.
Share this:
Like this:
Related
Shaun Duke
Follow Me
Newsletter
Support Me
Recent Posts
A Reading List of Dystopian Fiction and Relevant Texts (Apropos of Nothing in Particular)
Why would someone make a list of important and interesting works of dystopian fiction? Or a suggested reading list of works that are relevant to those dystopian works? There is absolutely no reason other than raw interest. There’s nothing going on to compel this. There is nothing in particular one making such a list would hope you’d learn. The lists below are not an exhaustive list. There are bound to be texts I have forgotten or texts you think folks should read that are not listed. Feel free to make your own list and tell me about it OR leave a comment. I’ll add things I’ve missed! Anywhoodles. Here goes:
Share this:
Like this:
Duke’s Best EDM Tracks of 2024
And so it came to pass that I finished up my annual Best of EDM [Insert Year Here] lists. I used to do these on Spotify before switching to Tidal, and I continued doing them on Tidal because I listen to an absurd amount of EDM and like keeping track of the tunes I love the most. Below, you will find a Tidal playlist that should be public. You can listen to the first 50 tracks right here, but the full playlist is available on Tidal proper (which has a free version just like Spotify does). For whatever reason, the embedded playlist breaks the page, and so I’ve opted to link to it here and at the bottom of this post. Embeds are weird. Or you can pull songs into your preferred listening app. It’s up to you. Some caveats before we begin:
Share this:
Like this:
2025: The Year of Something
We’re nine days into 2025, and it’s already full of exhausting levels of controversy before we’ve even had a turnover in power in my home country of the United States. We’ve seen resignations of world leaders, wars continuing and getting worse and worse (you know where), the owner of Twitter continuing his tirade of lunacy and demonstrating why the billionaire class is not to be revered, California ablaze with a horrendous and large wildfire, right wing thinktanks developing plans to out and attack Wikipedia editors as any fascist-friendly organization would do, Meta rolling out and rolling back GenAI profiles on its platforms, and, just yesterday, the same Meta announcing sweeping changes to its moderation policies that, in a charitable reading, encourage hate-based harassment and abuse of vulnerable populations, promotion and support for disinformation, and other problems, all of which are so profound that people are talking about a mass exodus from the platform to…somewhere. It’s that last thing that brings me back to the blog today. Since the takeover at Twitter, social networks have been in a state of chaos. Platforms have risen and fallen — or only risen so much — and nothing I would call stability has formed. Years ago, I (and many others far more popular than me) remarked that we’ve ceded the territory of self-owned or small-scale third party spaces for massive third party platforms where we have minimal to no control or say and which can be stripped away in a tech-scale heartbeat. By putting all our ducks into a bin of unstable chaos, we’re also expending our time and energy on something that won’t last, requiring us to expend more time and energy finding alternatives, rebuilding communities, and then repeating the process again. In the present environment, that’s impossible to ignore.1 This is all rather reductive, but this post is not the place to talk about all the ways that social networks have impacted control over our own spaces and narratives. Another time, perhaps. I similarly don’t have space to talk about the fact that some of the platforms we currently have, however functional they may be, have placed many of us in a moral quagmire, as in the case of Meta’s recent moderation changes. Another time… ↩
Share this:
Like this:
Categories