15 October 2022

Second Chances


 

A common question for fiction writers is Do editors often ask you to revise and resubmit a short story?

The answer, in my case, is no. Most of the editors of the magazines and anthologies I submit to tend to either accept a story or reject it, period, with no reasons mentioned and no second chances. 

But not always. Occasionally I'll send a story in and get back a note from the editor saying the submission almost made it but not quite, and asking if I would consider changing such-and-such and resubmitting? In that case, my answer is usually yes. In fact I can't think of a time when it wasn't yes. I make whatever change(s) they want, whether it's deleting something controversial, adding something that relates more to their theme or their market, revising the ending, etc. I have two reasons for trying hard to do what they ask me to: (1) it always results in a sale--at least it has for me--and (2) if/when I later sell that story as a reprint or use it in a collection of my own, I can change it right back to the way it was at first. So, simply put, why not?

I know a lot of folks who don't agree with giving in that easily, who resist/decline most editorial suggestions to revise and resubmit. To them I would say Fine--do what you want. But--again--I like to sell what I write, and I want to please the editor if I can. I also try to be agreeable when editors ask for changes after acceptance. Chances are, I'll be sending more stories to that publication in the future, and I'd prefer to be labeled Easy to Work With.

All this is not to say I've never suggested some alternative ways of changing things. Sometimes that works, sometimes it doesn't. And to argue at all depends on how strongly I feel about the changes.

Most after-acceptance requests for revision are too minor to ever think twice about. An editor once asked me if I could change "He cut his eyes at me" to something else because she wasn't familiar with the concept of eye-cutting. I changed it to "He gave me a suspicious look," which in my opinion wasn't as effective but which I also didn't consider worth fussing about. Other requests (whether pre-acceptance or post-) have involved revising story endings to be more upbeat, less happy, more concise, etc. In every case I can remember, I have saluted and merrily made that kind of change. And, as I said earlier, sometimes changed it right back again after publication.

One editorial discussion I recall--and I think I've mentioned it before at this blog--happened when Strand Magazine editor Andrew Gulli phoned me after the first story I ever submitted to him, back in 1999. He said the story was under consideration but he had a question about a poison I used in the story to do away with a main character's wife. "None of us here have ever heard of that poison," Andrew said. "Where'd you find out about it?" As it turned out, there was a reason they hadn't heard of it: I made it up. So after a long and awkward silence, I answered, "I made it up." Another pause. Andrew said, "You made it up?" I said, "Yep. I made it up." Yet another long silence dragged by. Finally he said, "Okay." And that was it. The story was published with my imaginary poison, which I think was derived from the oscolio blossoms of East Africa or some such thing, and the story went on to be listed by Otto Penzler in Best American Mystery Stories as one of the top 50 mysteries of that year. I learned a valuable lesson from that exchange: if you need something to perform a particular task in fiction and there's nothing available in real life that fits the bill, sometimes it's okay to dream up something believable that does work, plug it in, and go happily on your way. But I still remember how scared I was as a fairly new writer, saying what I said to a real editor.

I have so far never been asked to make structural plot revisions or change things like POV or my choice of the viewpoint character. Those would, after all, be major requests--if those things were wrong I suppose the story would probably have been rejected outright. I have, however, been asked now and then (by one market in particular) to change a story's title. Again, I almost always agree to that. And--very honestly--my titles are sometimes changed at that market without their ever even asking my permission. When that happens it always makes me feel a bit like Rodney Dangerfield, but the resulting paycheck seems to help a lot in soothing that discomfort.

The funniest dispute I've heard about, between editor and author, was described to me awhile back by one of my oldest and most-admired writer friends. I won't use names here, but the editor asked the writer to change the way one of the characters in a story set in the middle ages addressed a local warlord. The character said "milord" and the editor preferred "Sir Knight." The writer said "Sir Knight" sounded clumsy, and preferred "milord." The editor also objected to the phrase "like shit through a goose." The writer replied that the speaker was a soldier and should sound like one. After a long pause (I can relate to those) the editor sighed and said, "Tell you what. I'll trade you the milords for the shits." And that's what they did.

Question: What are some your own experiences, with regard to editorial requests? Are you often asked to make changes to a submitted short-story manuscript, either before or after acceptance? If so, have you usually agreed, or resisted? Did you win or lose the argument? What's the oddest/funniest thing you've been asked to change?

As my friend said to me following the description of his above encounter with the editor, sometimes that kind of back-and-forth game can be fun. After all, how many things in life are negotiable anymore?


That's it for today. Keep writing, and keep negotiating.



21 comments:

  1. I can think of only one or two things, John. One was changing the title– and why not? Sometimes those words are merely a working title that guide you through the writig process.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hi Leigh. I agree. And in editors' defense, sometimes a title change is requested because a similar title was used in a recent story at that publication, something of which the writer might even not be aware.

      I can think of several titles of mine that I felt were better before a change was made, but very honestly, I can also think of a time or two when I agreed that the editor's suggested title worked better than mine. One of those things that, again, might not be worth arguing about.

      Delete
  2. Hi John, I've been asked to rewrite, to change something or other and told maybe in the next issue. I too want to please the editor so I revise.Please keep me posted on Sleuthsayers. Cheers, Mary Jo

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Good for you, Mary Jo. I do the same. This issue, next issue, doesn't matter. To me, a request for revision is usually just a delayed acceptance, and a lot better than a rejection. Cheers back to you--thanks for stopping in.

      Delete
  3. Once I was challenged to rewrite a story. The boss editor said what he thought was wrong. I speculated that there was an internal disagreement because the response took over twice as long as they promised. This was a story I was sure of as is. I thanked the editor for his time and consideration and submitted the story unchanged the next day at another site. It was accepted without criticism within 24 hours and published soon after.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Glad that worked out. That's a good thing to do if you feel strongly enough about it, or if you felt the editor was badly wrong. As you said, there was probably a lot of debate about it before the response anyway, so it sounds as if the editor might've had some opposition in the ranks.

      If a story's good enough, it'll find the right home.

      Delete
  4. Nice piece, John!

    Some personal experiences along the same lines. After I submitted "Four Words," one of my Ellery Queen pastiches, to EQMM editor Janet Hutchings accepted the story but asked that I consider allowing a character who died in the original draft to instead live on. I agreed and re-wrote the ending. On re-submission she noted that the change in fact strengthened the story -- a conclusion with which I agreed. By contrast when I submitted "The Book Case," an earlier EQ pastiche that was novella length, Janet suggested doing away with a chronological listing of every Ellery Queen book that appeared in the early pages of the story. While the list took up some space I couldn't agree to get rid of it since the listing contained an important clue to the outcome of the mystery. I have also had one story rejected with a note saying the setting was good but there were problems with the mystery itself. I did a complete re-write, changing just about everything in the story except the setting, and on second submission the story, "The Mad Hatter's Riddle," was accepted.

    I have also been alerted to "stupid mistakes" that unwittingly pop into the narrative. I actually very much like receiving such comments since if I have made a stupid mistake so, too, might the character. In these occasions I leave the "stupid mistake" in and fashion it into yet another clue in solving the mystery at hand.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hey Dale. I'm not surprised that you've had some interesting experiences with EQMM, given your background and track record with them. Sounds as if Janet's suggestions were right on, and that you were smart to agree to make those revisions. As I mentioned earlier, when those kinds of changes are made at the request of a respected editor, I almost always agree--they often make the story better.

      I make plenty of stupid mistakes, and I too like to be told about them. Your observation's interesting, though, because I've heard others say too that certain mistakes can be blamed on the character! Ain't fiction great??

      Delete
  5. I've been edited by our own Barb Goffman, Josh Pachtler, and Michael Bracken. All of whom made suggestions and comments that seemed good to me, especially about "Bad Influence" which is coming out in our upcoming SleuthSayers anthology. (The main problem with that one was that I assumed people had prior knowledge of my Laskin world, and I agree that was a mistake.)

    The only time I completely rejected editorial comments was working with a small private publishing company to put together a collection of my short stories. They hired an editor who proceeded to tell me to rewrite every single story as she wanted them to be rewritten (all of which had been published in AHMM), including one of my personal pride & joys, "Drifts", which Michael Bracken took years ago without a single editing comment, and so did Linda Landrigan, later when the anthology fell through. I refused, and cancelled the collection. Never regretted that.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Eve, good for you. With some "editors" the mystery is, How did they get their job?

      Delete
    2. Good choice, Eve! That's one of those cases (which I think are rare) where an editor is NOT acting in your best interests regarding changes, etc. It's obvious here that you new far more than she did about the quality of the stories. Also, there was more at stake here because it was an entire collection and not just one story for a magazine sale, etc.

      As for Barb, Josh, and Michael, yes, I trust all three of them and have always gone with their editorial decisions. I wish all editors were as smart and professional as those three.

      Delete
  6. John, for me the key words in this piece were "I still remember." I still remember every single time an editor made me make a change I didn't like but did because, as you say, we all want to be published and considered easy to work with. One that leaps to mind is "changed" for "traded in" in my first poetry book in 1981 because the editor "liked 'changed' better. It ruined the cadence of the line, so I've said "traded in" every time I've read the poem aloud for forty years. Another is when legendary editor Ruth Cavin wouldn't accept "God" as the nickname of chief victim Godfrey Brandon Kettleworth III in DEATH WILL GET YOU SOBER, my first novel. ("Hi, I'm God, I'm an alcoholic.") Ruth, who was 90 at the time, was afraid it would alienate readers. I persisted, but Ruth Cavin was God at St. Martin's at that time (Minotaur didn't exist yet), so after she said No three times, I gave in. People who've read the hardcover think Godfrey's nickname was Guff. But the substitute has never passed my lips, and when I sold the e-book rights to another publisher (all rights later reverted to me), I was incredibly relieved to make the change.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ha! Good idea, Liz--if you don't like a change that was requested and made in your story (or poem), just read the original version in a public reading! And I must agree with you, on the Godfrey nickname. Glad you restored (resurrected??) it to its original form in later sales!! Sometimes the editor, no matter how famous and respected, is NOT right.

      Thanks as always!

      Delete
  7. The first story I sold to AHMM is one that Linda Landrigan had me rewrite twice. She liked the beginning and the end but the middle didn't work. She was right, and the story is much, much better for the revisions.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sounds like the revising was worth it, Michael. She's asked me to change things twice, I think, and I did it right away, chop chop. When she (and Janet too) want changes, I hop to it.

      Delete
  8. Thanks for the kind words, Eve and John. And John, good column. I too like to be agreeable. I hope that by accepting nearly all editorial suggestions, editors will be more agreeable at the times I want to demur.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Barb, I think the key is to choose your battles. I can't see arguing with an editor about something that honestly just doesn't matter that much--besides the fact that the ed. probably really does know more than the writer, in most of these cases.

      Seriously, thank you for all the stories of mine that you have made BETTER, over the years.

      Delete
  9. An editor once told me he didn't like my title. I agreed. I really didn't like the title, either, but couldn't come up with anything else. I told him whatever title he chose with would be fine with me.
    The story was printed with my original title.
    Bob

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ha! Bob, sounds like your title was fine from the get-go.

      Unfortunately for me, the only times editors have suggested a different title from mine was when I really really liked my title. Go figure.

      Delete
  10. Twice I have been told to rewrite a story to get it accepted. Stan Schmidt at Analog back in the day had me rewrite a story twice, and one of those times, he told me to put more conflict in the climax. Both editors who asked for rewrites pointed out things that needed fixing to make the story stronger. I appreciated working with them both.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous, I've heard nothing but good things about Stan Schmidt, and I can only say I wish he HAD asked me for rewrites--I wound up only with rejections from Analog. And yes, the good editors can definitely make our stories stronger. Congrats to you on those revisions and acceptances.

      Thanks for stopping in at SleuthSayers!

      Delete

Welcome. Please feel free to comment.

Our corporate secretary is notoriously lax when it comes to comments trapped in the spam folder. It may take Velma a few days to notice, usually after digging in a bottom drawer for a packet of seamed hose, a .38, her flask, or a cigarette.

She’s also sarcastically flip-lipped, but where else can a P.I. find a gal who can wield a candlestick phone, a typewriter, and a gat all at the same time? So bear with us, we value your comment. Once she finishes her Fatima Long Gold.

You can format HTML codes of <b>bold</b>, <i>italics</i>, and links: <a href="https://about.me/SleuthSayers">SleuthSayers</a>