Analog Submissions

[hazlett]

I'm thinking of submitting a fantasy story to Analog, and writing something in the cover letter to the effect of:

"A temporary glitch in our frontal lobe led us to briefly overlook your submissions policy, so we sent you this fantasy story."

I won't do it of course. But it would give me a great deal of satisfaction.

[Hellstrom]

I'm thinking of submitting a fantasy story to Analog, and writing something in the cover letter to the effect of:

"A temporary glitch in our frontal lobe led us to briefly overlook your submissions policy, so we sent you this fantasy story."

I won't do it of course. But it would give me a great deal of satisfaction.

I have a similar idea. I want to submit a story along with a note that says: Hey, I know you're going to sit on this for six months and then send a form rejection, so here's a big fuck you in advance. Oh and btw, fuck you!

But yeah, not going to do that.

[hazlett]

It wouldn't be so bad if Analog allowed simultaneous submissions. But they don't.

Plus, in a form rejection email in which you hold someone's story hostage for 300 days, it is generally neither accurate nor empathetic to use the word "briefly" anywhere in the document.

[Leo T. Lion]

Well, I got no response at all. I still haven't heard a thing.

My email to them wasn't rude. I think they owe me a few words. I think even "Fuck off" would be better than the silence.

[s_c_baker]

Well, I got no response at all. I still haven't heard a thing.

My email to them wasn't rude. I think they owe me a few words. I think even "Fuck off" would be better than the silence.

I think you may be attributing far too much personal malice--or indeed personal feeling at all--to what is likely just a technical glitch in a system where everything personal is stripped out long before the editor gets his hands on a story. (The system they use probably sends e-mails when they mark a story as rejected, so blaming the editor for doing it without contacting you might be off the mark. They may be just as surprised as you to realize the system didn't contact you.)

It would sure be nice of Analog to reply to your e-mail and say, for instance, "sorry about that." But given how Analog is with response time and submission volume, your e-mail may still be languishing unread, depending on where you sent it. That they're not responding certainly doesn't mean they want you to "fuck off."

One thing that I always try to remember (even though it's hard for me to do so) is that editors are first and foremost professionals with a job to do. This job is not to give authors breaks. It isn't to go out of their way to make sure submissions are responded to quickly and politely and with personal comments.

Their job, in fact, has little to do with actual authors unless and until they actually buy a story. So what is their job? It is to make each issue of their magazine a solid collection of fiction which fits in with their magazine's mission.

That's all they're there to do, and it's to that job they must first devote their time and attention.

Sure, those things are nice when they happen. One could theoretically argue that doing so will make the editor's job easier, since their magazine will gain a reputation for speed, politeness, and critical excellence will likely follow as all the top-tier authors start to sit up and pay attention (a la Lightspeed and Clarkesworld).

But, still, those politenesses are courtesies, not obligations.

So, not to be rude, but Analog doesn't really owe you anything. I agree it's aggravating and a little unprofessional of them not to even send you an e-mail to let you know your story was rejected after hanging on to it for so damn long. Or, for that matter, for them to hold on to it for so damn long at all without word.

Likewise, editors who hold on to stories for a long time without looking at it are not holding a story hostage. They're not doing it to piss anybody off or to make new authors suffer. They're just using an inefficient system, at best, or--at worst--a little too full of the role of their magazine and editorship in the field, and forgetting that all these stories they're looking at actually belong to people.

But still, them's the breaks. And although I know it's hard, it's better to give an editor the benefit of the doubt than it is to harbor some silent (or not-so-silent) grudge against him or her.

And if you really want to get back at them, submit and sell the story elsewhere once it's come back to you. That'll learn 'em!

[Leo T. Lion]

I disagree. I think that, as soon as you ask for exclusivity, which is what no sim subbing means, you have entered into trust with that party. As such I believe they owe their contributors the best service they can manage. Incompetence doesn't excuse poor service. If they can't keep their end of the bargain, why would anyone bother to sub exclusively to them? I am being too kind in my decision to boycott Analog. I should really SIM sub everything I have to them.

[s_c_baker]

I disagree. I think that, as soon as you ask for exclusivity, which is what no sim subbing means, you have entered into trust with that party. As such I believe they owe their contributors the best service they can manage. Incompetence doesn't excuse poor service. If they can't keep their end of the bargain, why would anyone bother to sub exclusively to them? I am being too kind in my decision to boycott Analog. I should really SIM sub everything I have to them.

They're not forcing you to submit to them. If you don't like their terms of use and business practices, just don't submit there. (I don't.)

You are of course welcome to disagree, but I don't think asking for exclusive submissions in any way enters into any sort of bargain or deal with submitting authors. Or, if it does, the bargain is at most limited to "I will agree to look at this story and either accept or reject it."

Anyhow, the main reason I suggest not attributing personal malice to the actions of editors has nothing to do with agreements or being owed things (or not). The main reason I suggest it is because it makes me a lot happier than I would be if I were to feel slighted every time I got an unreasonably long form rejection. And believe me, I've gotten plenty of those.

[Leo T. Lion]

I agree. We can expect an acceptance or rejection. Within a reasonable length of time.

I don't take it personally. I'm sure they have no idea who I am. I've sent stuff off to pretty much everyone - and they're the only ones who have come off distinctly unprofessional... yet they're the biggest of the lot.

[TomKnighton]

Well, I'm still there at 242 days. Still no response and no response to the query I sent a month and a half ago. Honestly, I'm fine with a rejection at this point. It's the whole not knowing thing that's bothering me.

[Helen Jackson]

Just got a rejection, at 339 days. It was polite, apologetic, came from Trevor Quachri, and included the encouraging line "I think it's a good story, and I very strongly considered it for ANALOG". Would I submit to Analog again? Hell, yes! ...just not with anything that I mind being out of circulation for a while.

(By the way, Tom, I'd queried a month ago and this was the response. Hope you also hear soon -- and that you get better news!)

[george nik.]

Just got a rejection, at 339 days. It was polite, apologetic, came from Trevor Quachri, and included the encouraging line "I think it's a good story, and I very strongly considered it for ANALOG". Would I submit to Analog again? Hell, yes! ...just not with anything that I mind being out of circulation for a while.

(By the way, Tom, I'd queried a month ago and this was the response. Hope you also hear soon -- and that you get better news!)

That's very encouraging, Helen! As far as rejections go, this is one of the best I've heard of!

[E.CaimanSands]

Yeah, Helen, that's a very close one for sure!

[preston]

Just got a rejection, at 339 days. It was polite, apologetic, came from Trevor Quachri, and included the encouraging line "I think it's a good story, and I very strongly considered it for ANALOG". Would I submit to Analog again? Hell, yes! ...just not with anything that I mind being out of circulation for a while.

(By the way, Tom, I'd queried a month ago and this was the response. Hope you also hear soon -- and that you get better news!)

Oooh, I'll be looking for your name in those Analog pages, Helen. Send them another!

[LDWriter2]

Just got a rejection, at 339 days. It was polite, apologetic, came from Trevor Quachri, and included the encouraging line "I think it's a good story, and I very strongly considered it for ANALOG". Would I submit to Analog again? Hell, yes! ...just not with anything that I mind being out of circulation for a while.

(By the way, Tom, I'd queried a month ago and this was the response. Hope you also hear soon -- and that you get better news!)

That is a Niiice one.

More than likely you will be there in a few stories, even if it does take them so long to say so.

[LDWriter2]

My story is still out at Analog, but it's been maybe half the duration of most of those commenting here. Ironically IGMS seems to be speeding up some, but now I can send my Q1 story to them.

However my story at F&SF is late. For them it's not just a little late, but as seems to be the way things go when I complain about a magazine being late I will say so--with a slight change this time.

I should be getting the acceptance any day now.

[Hellstrom]

Congrats. Helen! Even though it wasn't a sale, just knowing that your work was under serious consideration can be a real shot in the arm.

[Helen Jackson]

Thanks everyone! It's still a rejection, but it's good to feel I'm getting close. I've already sent the story out to another market.

Good luck to all of you still waiting to hear.

[LDWriter2]

Thanks everyone! It's still a rejection, but it's good to feel I'm getting close. I've already sent the story out to another market.

Good luck to all of you still waiting to hear.

Oh and I would think it makes it a better chance someone else will like it enough to buy. That does happen I hear.

[bobsandiego]

Just got a rejection, at 339 days. It was polite, apologetic, came from Trevor Quachri, and included the encouraging line "I think it's a good story, and I very strongly considered it for ANALOG". Would I submit to Analog again? Hell, yes! ...just not with anything that I mind being out of circulation for a while.

(By the way, Tom, I'd queried a month ago and this was the response. Hope you also hear soon -- and that you get better news!)

CONGRATULATIONS
As rejections go that is awesome

[Ishmael]

Helen's example is inspiring! I sent them another story. Now round about this time next year you will wish you had too. Remember you read it here first.

And congratulations to Helen.

[LDWriter2]

Yeah, I probably will send in another soon even though it looks like mine don't take that long to reject.

[LDWriter2]

Hmmm, wonder if F&SF is sympathizing with Analog. This is the second story in a row that has taken over twice as long as normal. We shall see how much longer they take.

[LDWriter2]

I was going to say that now I have two stories at S&SF that are late-one very late for them, but I received both today.

So maybe they are not being sympathetic to Analog after all, as I suggested.

[hazlett]

I just got a personal rejection from Analog earlier this week:

"I rather like your style of writing and suggest that you try us again."

It was completely unexpected, because the story I sent was not your typical Analog story (i.e., heavy on science being central to the story).

I'm now cautiously optimistic about my future prospects since this is my first personal rejection from Analog.

[Martin L. Shoemaker]

I just got a personal rejection from Analog earlier this week:

"I rather like your style of writing and suggest that you try us again."

It was completely unexpected, because the story I sent was not your typical Analog story (i.e., heavy on science being central to the story).

I'm now cautiously optimistic about my future prospects since this is my first personal rejection from Analog.

Trevor keeps saying he wants to see more than your typical Analog story. Mind you, everything he has bought from me fits that mold, and he has rejected my stuff that doesn't. Still, he says he wants a broader range of stories.

[s_c_baker]

I know one recent Analog purchase was set in pre-modern China, and involved Eunuchs and earthquake-making schemes so... He's definitely trying to move away from the impression that the only Analog story is a story about space-travel-type hard science.

[LDWriter2]

Reading this reminded me to send another story out tonight, but while I was at it I decided on one to send to Analog.

He said he wanted something different from their usual. Of course he would want one with good writing, so we shall see.

As a side note I also found a remade market. It was around a few years ago and I just saw it came back so I sent one to them too.

[Martin L. Shoemaker]

There are some signs of Trevor catching up.

The Grinder shows 16 rejections and 1 acceptance in the past week, time ranging from 73 to 327 days. The acceptance was at 262 days, so a long delay does not necessarily mean a rejection (or an acceptance): it just means a long delay.

Duotrope shows 4 rejections and 2 acceptances in the same week, time ranging from 133 to 365 days. The two acceptances were at 174 and 365 days.

Let's hope this trend continues.

[Jeffrey]

The Grinder shows 16 rejections and 1 acceptance in the past week, time ranging from 73 ...

Per duotrope, that rejection at 70ish days was poetry & an outlier by more than half the usual response time. It's encouraging there's movement, but premature to say he's catching up (at least in respect to Stan's response times). And congrats on your own April 22 good news!

[Martin L. Shoemaker]

The Grinder shows 16 rejections and 1 acceptance in the past week, time ranging from 73 ...

Per duotrope, that rejection at 70ish days was poetry & an outlier by more than half the usual response time. It's encouraging there's movement, but premature to say he's catching up (at least in respect to Stan's response times). And congrats on your own April 22 good news!

Thanks! I'm exceptionally proud of that story, and very pleased that Trevor liked it.