|Posted on Sunday, August 03, 2003 - 04:57 am: |
Someone has just written to the new Nemonymous forum here:
with 'Nemonymity Lost' as his subject. This message is in respect of the recent submission guidelines offering to consider stories where the by-line will be attached to the story upon publication (as well as those who continue to be happy with 'late labelling' or would be happy *never* to have their name divulged). This message says:
"I don't get it.
Des has done his utmost to promote his concept; making up his own philosophies to rationalise the idea of anonymous publishing; defending it everywhere people wanted (and did not want) to listen. The Nemonymous name itself refers to that concept. I personally think it's a shame that he now drops the core idea.
It may be, as suggested elsewhere, a way of generating more interest and discussion - but why risk the entire concept for the sake of another minute in the limelight? (In other, more lucrative, circumstances this would be called "selling out", I think ;-)
I think of Nemonymous as a valuable experiment - for all kinds of reasons, most of which have been dwelled upon at length by people much more eloquent than me. I don't think it has anything to do with 'the future of publishing', and I don't think it is bad for starting authors to be published in its pages. I do think it helps make the publishing landscape more interesting. Thank you, Des.
And I *hope* that contributors would choose to stay with the late-labelling. But I won't hold my breath. Of course, given the fact that contributors need to indicate their preference when they submit, Des could shrewdly choose to buy only the 'true' nemonymous stories..."
|Posted on Sunday, August 03, 2003 - 05:51 am: |
Someone else has now written to the same place with these words:
"I feel this must be seconded. (Though the truth is not merely a matter of social proof.)
There is no shortage of magazines that are not Nemonymous. Ultimately, it is Des's magazine - his choice. Mixed Nemonymosity is also an experiment. But you must then call it Heteronymous!
(Otherwise you are lying!)"
|Posted on Sunday, August 03, 2003 - 06:06 am: |
Well, the word 'nemonymous' could equally apply to all submissions for Nemo~4 needing to be anonymously sent to the publisher - as well
as to 'late labelling' -- and 'late labelling' itself is surely not *pure* nemonymity, anyway --- unlike with the 'Escobada' story in Nemo~2 which, to date, has remained, to my knowledge, wholly anonymous, despite unmatchable reviews!
At the end of the day, I do not have a bottomless purse to keep on producing Nemonymous. I do actually believe in the philosophy behind Nemonymous (including the 'shared universe' idea for Nemo~4 and 'late labelling') -- whilst having the ambition to break even financially, which I am, so far, short of doing. 'Shared universes' as well as considering anonymous submissions for by-lined publication -- as well as all the other things I truly believe in and can substantiate -- do help towards prospective sales. Surely that is obvious.
|Posted on Monday, August 04, 2003 - 05:10 am: |
Have you separate definitions for nemonymity and anonymity? I always assumed that Nemonymous referered to late-labelling.
|Posted on Monday, August 04, 2003 - 08:09 am: |
'Anonymity' is what it is according to the dictionary...
'Nemonymity', for me, has always been about creatively using anonymity in the field of short fiction with the hope of provoking new ideas in the way we read and publish fiction (not an over-grand or pretentious hope - because, first and foremost, it merely gives a rare opportunity for a writer to have something published and/or considered by editor without their by-line attached - but, inadvertently, has also seemed to evoke such ideas of fictional gestalt and presentational effects and fresh feelings of creativity in the writers themselves etc. (all of which I never originally predicted and as attested by much writer/reader feedback and reviews) ---
and 'Nemonymity', *so far*, has entailed and also just starting to entail (in various permutations):
(a) Anonymous submissions that are accepted/rejected before knowing who wrote it.
(b) Stories that are 'late labelled' (in the classic Nemonymous format to date).
(c) Stories that are intended to remain anonymous forever (such as the 'Escobada' story in Nemo*2).
(d) Stories that are submitted anonymously with the wish that they be by-lined in the issue of Nemo they are published in (but accepted/rejected whilst the writer is still anonymous to the publisher).
Hope that's clear! I could go on. ;-)
|Posted on Monday, August 04, 2003 - 09:16 am: |
Clearer: anonymity used for artistic benefit, I guess. If the idea takes flight beyond Nemonymous itself, at least there will be an apt term to describe it.
I think we may well need a Desctionary for all your self-created words soon, Des, and you can stick that in there too, without fear of anti-shared-world reprisal from myself ;)
|Posted on Monday, August 04, 2003 - 09:29 am: |
In that Descritionary:
Nemonomics (though mnemonics, phenemonological (sp.?), unemotional, etc already have 'nemo' embedded)
And phrases used in new contexts:
|Posted on Saturday, November 22, 2003 - 06:26 am: |
(1) Fiction = Text
(2) What can be taken from (or given to) the text = reader's 'opinion' or 'reaction' (manifold opinions and reactions, all different).
(3) The nearer one is able to reach towards the noumenon of the text, the more one can shuffle off the variably misleading and unknowable historical, biographical, critical, academic extrapolations from the text = my opinion.