Editor Interview: Amazing Stories Magazine

Hopepunk sci fi.

Having gone to my share of science fiction conventions, I have met a lot of small press and independent publishers. They are the people I most admire: often working on shoestring budgets, they publish books because they love the written word. (It is also true that they often publish the most interesting work because they are not as beholden to strict commercial interests.) Among these, I would include: Elizabeth Hirst's Pop Seagull Press; Catherine Fitzsimmons' Brain Lag Press; and Hayden Trenholm's Bundoran Press. I would also highly recommend Elsewhen Press, although, in the interest of full disclosure, I would point out that it publishes my novels.

My background is humour, not necessarily speculative fiction, so my tastes tend to reflect that. My favourite author, bar none, is Thomas Pynchon, a chameleon whose every book is unique, but whose voice is unmistakable. Although my writing has been compared to that of Douglas Adams and Terry Pratchett (both writers I admire), the comparison in a review that felt most right to me was to Tom Robbins (author of Even Cowgirls Get the Blues). I was a screenwriting geek before I was a prose geek, so my taste has also been influenced by such performers as Buster Keaton, Woody Allen, The Marx Brothers, The Goon Show and Monty Python's Flying Circus.

That's a tough one. We are committed to diversity (we have managed almost gender parity starting with our second issue) and are always open to submissions from minorities (when we haven't reached out to minority communities). We are looking for more hopeful speculative fiction to counteract what the principles in the magazine see as a dark turn in science fiction. And, given my background as a humourist, I put a high premium on humour and fun. Most magazines in the field have one or more of these aims, but I don't believe any of them achieve quite the same mix that we do.

Read the magazine and our submissions guidelines. Read the submissions guidelines to ensure that you follow them to the letter (for instance: do not send us a story that is more than 10,000 words long when we specifically state that number in the guidelines; your story will be rejected without being read, wasting everybody's time). Read the magazine to see how the guidelines are actually put into practice.

My ideal submission is between 4,000 and 6,000 words long. It is a wondrous adventure with characters I haven't encountered before. It is funny. In addition, it uses the genre to say something about how we live today (partially because I write a lot of satire, so I put a high premium on social commentary, but mostly because all art should be a reflection of the way people live). My criterion for my own writing is to create something that will invoke in the reader surprise and delight. Surprise an delight me.

We use an anonymous submissions system in order to ensure that the slush readers show no favouritism. This means that there should be no markings identifying the author of a story on the file of the story that is submitted to us. Unfortunately, this frequently happens. (In the submissions portal there is a space for the author to write an accompanying letter: they can identify themselves all they want there.)

Cover letters are only interesting after the fact (if we have any interest in publishing the story). We are much more concerned about the quality of the story submitted. No, previous publications aren't all that important to us: we have published well known authors and we have published first time authors. Again, the quality of the story is the most important criterion.

I have instructed the slush readers to only read as much of a story as they need to get the sense of it. A poorly written story, or one that is too dark for us or otherwise fails to meet our needs will be evident pretty quickly. No need to waste their time on a story if it is immediately apparent that we won't publish it. Once they send stories to me for my consideration, I will read the entire story. Partially, this is because I don't feel I can properly judge a story that I have not completely read, partially this is because I have a psychological quirk that I cannot stop reading a story until the end. I have read some terrible novels to the end because of this. If anybody knows a cure...

There are plenty. Is the author a member of an underrepresented minority? Is the story similar to something we have already recently run, or are currently considering running? Is the story truly something new, or a small variation on an established story? Is the author's voice unique? (I'm very big on personal style; conversely, if the story reads like it could have been written by a dozen or more other writers, I'm more likely to pass on it.) Then, there are intangible qualities that I'm hard-pressed to put into words...

It has changed since the magazine started publishing again. When we first opened for submissions, we were deluged; without sufficient slush readers, my days were spent slogging through the slush pile. After several months, we got that process under control. At that point, I would only read the stories that were sent to me by the slush readers.
I'm sure my process is the same as any other editor. Two months before publication, there is an intense editing period which lasts roughly two to three weeks. This involves an email back and forth between myself and the writers. In the month before publication, the back and forth is between myself and the Art Director, Kermit Woodall (as laid out, the text has to be proofread to ensure that the best version appears in print). There is always communications between myself and Kermit and Publisher Steve Davidson to ensure that things are on track.
I have also done what I could to promote the magazine. I'm always happy to appear on podcasts (hint...hint...), be interviewed and appear at science fiction conventions. I was also one of the hosts of The Gernsback Machine: An Amazing Podcast (with Gisela McKay and Hugh Spencer). Look for our second season to start in a couple of months (http://listen.amazingstories.com/?p=home).
All in all, it's a full day's work, being a magazine editor.

One of the fantastic things about being deluged by stories is that, by the time I have chosen what to publish, the quality is very high. It is unlikely that a story accepted by Amazing Stories will require substantial plot or character changes. Once in a while, it happens, but not often. So, the editing for the magazine usually consists of line editing and copy editing.
My feeling is that the relationship between the author and the editor should be a kind of dance. We both have the same goal: to make the story as good as it can be. We just need to negotiate what that is. I will impose some changes on a story (to make it conform to the magazine's house style, for instance, which, in some ways, is not industry standard). However, when it comes to style or phrasing, I generally make suggestions to the author, which they can then accept or reject. Then, it is back and forth until we are both satisfied. In most substantial ways, the author has a final approval.

Yes. We're very proud of the stories we publish, and would love to see them get the recognition they deserve.