Nemonymous Five Log Out | Topics | Search
Moderators | Register | Edit Profile

HOME | CATALOG | DOWNLOADS | LINKS | EDITORIALS | DISCUSSION | CONTACT

Topics | Last Day | Last Week | Tree View | Search | User List | Help/Instructions | Log Out | Edit Profile | Register
Night Shade Message Boards » Nemonymous » Nemonymous Five « Previous Next »

Author Message
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

des
Posted on Wednesday, September 08, 2004 - 08:22 am:   

I would like some feedback, if possible.

When I start work on Nemonymous Part Five in due course, I am seriously considering the following:

1. The Anonymous angle will be devoted simply to all story submissions – as happened with Nemonymous Part Four – being considered when they are still anonymous (i.e. sent by means of anonymous emails), and considered in this way up to and beyond the point of *final* acceptance or rejection. I feel this was an important innovation. It seems so very logical and satisfying to all parties, I cannot believe other editors have not followed suit.

2. Stories will be published alongside their by-lines for the first time in `Nemonymous'. The lack of by-lines (followed by late- labelling in a subsequent issue) originally was an another interesting, groundbreaking -- and, indeed, fruitful -- experiment (to which many of you have attested). The repercussions of such a method are still out with the jury, but the signs are good from many points of view. I am proud that Nemonymous One in 2001 was the world's very first self-contained multi-authored volume of anonymous stories collected as such. However, human nature being what it is, this has been a distraction to the main purpose of `Nemonymous': one gimmick too far, perhaps. That main purpose was to provide a vehicle for *eclectic*, genreless short-fiction: with the stories as separate entities and as a gestalt. I hope you will read my brief article on `The Ominous Imagination' here: http://www.nemonymous.com for further context plus the interview here http://lostpages.net/lostpages.html
This eclectic aspect for me – based on reviews and feedback – has been the greatest success of `Nemonymous'.

No decisions above are set in stone.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Neil
Posted on Wednesday, September 08, 2004 - 08:52 am:   

Des. I disagree with losing the late-labelling. I think it's an important distinction between Nemonymous and other fiction zines. There are plenty of ecelctic fiction venues around. Having anonymous stories adds to my reading experience.

Agree with keeping the anonymous subs, though many webmail providers might not.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

des
Posted on Wednesday, September 08, 2004 - 08:55 am:   

Agree with keeping the anonymous subs, though many webmail providers might not.
**********


Thanks, Neil.
But I don't understand that last bit. Do you mean that email providers disapprove of emails with names that do not disclose the true identity of the poster? If so, there is nothing to stop submitters using a friend's email etc.
des

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

des
Posted on Wednesday, September 08, 2004 - 10:05 am:   

An intriguing response I've just received direct -- relating to above announcement that I also made to Veils & Piques:

"I think you have passed the test of fire and can now print the bylines with the stories. If that seems like something you'd like to do."
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Jamie
Posted on Wednesday, September 08, 2004 - 12:10 pm:   

I think you could do that if you want, Des, but it would seem very un-Nemo.

If you want to include the bylines in the magazine, why not include them but leave them unassociated with the stories? Either by having the names appear but no indication as to who wrote which story (which would help with publicity, if you were so inclined) or by going the route I had intended with IQ, and indicating in a note at the end of the issue who wrote which story?
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

des
Posted on Wednesday, September 08, 2004 - 10:44 pm:   

Thanks, Jamie. I'm getting some very mixed feedback on this so far!
I'm also thinking of changing the name to:

MEGAZANTHUS
Short Fiction From The Ominous Imagination
A by-lined Nemonymous where submissions were editorially accepted or rejected when still anonymous.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Brendan
Posted on Wednesday, September 08, 2004 - 11:33 pm:   

I agree with Jamie. Have by-lines, but don't say who wrote what until the following issue. Maybe offer a prize for anyone who can successfully match all stories to correct authors.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

KeithB
Posted on Thursday, September 09, 2004 - 05:00 am:   

Hi, Des,

Of course, it's your baby, but I wouldn't want to change anything. When I tell people about Nemonymous it's the late-labelling aspect that really gets their attention - anonymous submission is common in contests (where the cover sheet is removed, so judging is at least anonymyous), but I don't know of anywhere else doing the late-labelling thing.

As for the name: I can see that the late-labelling doesn't help with marketing, as names sell books/mags, but changing the name would only make marketing even more difficult - another way to make it hard to buy Nemo! It takes time for publication names to become established with your potential readership; renaming would just confuse matters, and destroy whatever "brand identity" (yeugh, horrible phrase) you have.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Nicholas Liu
Posted on Thursday, September 09, 2004 - 08:02 am:   

If you get rid of the late-labelling, there will no longer be any reason for it to be called Nemonymous. It will be as if you had simply stopped doing Nemo and started doing another, ordinary magazine that just happened to have the same name.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

des
Posted on Thursday, September 09, 2004 - 08:53 am:   

Thanks, everyone, so far. I'm actually getting lots and lots of feedback (on various message boards, mailing lists and privately), mostly along the lines of Keith's message above. Though some significant dissenters from this view.

Nicholas, great to hear from you after a long while.
I did post a proposed change earlier which covers your point about it not deserving to be called 'Nemonymous' without late-labelling, along these lines:

MEGAZANTHUS or MAGAZANTHUS or meGAZAnthUS ?
Short Fiction From The Ominous Imagination
A by-lined Nemonymous where story submissions are editorially accepted or rejected when still anonymous.

The anonymous angle is still retained, as you see, with an editorial system that, as far as I know, has only been carried out by myself.
des
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Brendan
Posted on Thursday, September 09, 2004 - 01:30 pm:   

Though I like the name Megazanthus, I think you should still keep Nemonymous as the name for brand recognition.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

JV
Posted on Thursday, September 09, 2004 - 01:56 pm:   

I think that it's very important to continue to publish without the bylines. Yours is the only magazine in the world, that I know of, that subverts reader expectations and prejudices by not publishing the byline with the story.

At the very least, consider just posting the bylines in alphabetical order on the table of contents page without assignment them to their correct story. That way we know what authors are in the magazine, but not who wrote what. Then you can effectively advertise the magazine as containing work by the writers in question but keep your uniqueness.

In fact, you could just print all the names on the back cover of the magazine and keep your interior the same as always.

I am horrified at the thought of this drastic change you've outlined.

JeffV
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

des
Posted on Friday, September 10, 2004 - 08:21 am:   

DRAFT guidelines below. Thanks everyone for their feedback. It has been very useful – in fact great quantities of interesting comments, so please excuse me if I don’t reply personally to you.

Below are some roughly drafted guidelines for Nemonymous Five. There is yet no plan as to when these will be issued for real. Indeed, my comments under the heading NEMONYMOUS FUTURE on http://www.nemonymous.com still apply. However, they give some guidance as the direction my mind is going - following your feedback.

************************
Draft Guidelines for Nemonymous~5

Closing Date:

Email address for submission to be sent:

Published stories will be paid £45 (45 pounds sterling) each.

Submissions must be anonymous. It is relatively easy to set up an anonymous email – but if there is a problem, perhaps you can get a non-writer friend to send it.

REQUIRED: A new story that you feel suitable for Nemonymous – between 250 and 5500 words, unpublished before in any medium - and no simultaneous or multiple submissions.

The accepted stories will be contracted to appear without their by-line but with the intention of publishing the authors’ names in the subsequent issue of Nemonymous.

Because there is a rule of no multiple submissions, if two or more stories are accepted from the same writer then that automatically will exclude *all* these stories from being published. Of course, if a story is rejected, then its writer can submit another within the timeframe. One easing of this rule: if a story collaboration is submitted this would not exclude one of its writers also submitting a story in his or her own right.

When an anonymous submission is received, the sender will be asked four questions (one about each previous issue of Nemonymous), only *one* of which questions he or she needs to answer correctly. This question will be easy (a mere formality) *if* that writer has the relevant copy of Nemonymous to hand. If no question is answered correctly, the anonymous submission will be rejected without even reading it. It is considered that this rule is only practical when one is dealing with anonymous submissions. Nemonymous is not restricting submissions to subscribers since Nemonymous does not have subscribers. It is simply that anonymous story submissions will be rejected out of hand when the writers have failed to do their homework, i.e. bought or borrowed at least one edition of Nemonymous. This will ease the time factor of reading many stories that are unsuitable for Nemonymous, with a possible but acceptable downside risk of missing a great story submission.

End of DRAFT guidelines
******************************************

Further feedback would be welcome. Des
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

des
Posted on Saturday, September 11, 2004 - 10:34 am:   

Jetse has written to me with helpful input on the last para of draft guidelines above (Thanks Jetse!):


"Although I agree that writers should do their homework, and buy or read at least one issue of the magazine they're submitting to, I do think that wilfully excluding submitters on that criterium is taking things a bit too far.
How about something like this:

'After passing the first round of the Nemonymous_ readings, the seriously cosidered submitter will be asked four questions (one about each previous
issue of Nemonymous) ... This question will be easy (a mere formality) *if* that writer has the relevant copy of Nemonymous to hand. In case of equal merit, preference will be given to those that can answer the most answers correctly.'

In this way, I think, the impetus to buy Nemonymous is given in a more subtle way."



However, I do not see the need to be subtle when responding to anonymous submissions. It is more difficult, I agree, when metaphorically 'eyeball to eyeball', say, with a friend or a big name.

Furthermore, how can someone logically submit anything to a magazine without knowing anything about it? All they need to do is buy or *borrow* a single copy with the method embodied in my original draft wording. It's about time, perhaps, that logic came into this process. There has been too much personalisation before ... too much name culture and mutuality. Anonymity at the editorial stage allows logic and fairness on both sides - and hopefully the best results for all parties. And logic entails having at least one copy of the magazine in one's possession at the point of submission, even if one hasn't bought it. I hereby promise to *lend* copies of Nemonymous to those who are interested enough to approach me. Otherwise it's like shooting in the dark. And potentially wasting everyone's time.

des
http://www.nemonymous.com





Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

des
Posted on Saturday, September 11, 2004 - 10:43 am:   

Jetse has written to me with helpful input on the last para of draft guidelines above (Thanks Jetse!) - quoted with his permission:


"Although I agree that writers should do their homework, and buy or read at least one issue of the magazine they're submitting to, I do think that wilfully excluding submitters on that criterium is taking things a bit too far.
How about something like this:

'After passing the first round of the Nemonymous_ readings, the seriously cosidered submitter will be asked four questions (one about each previous
issue of Nemonymous) ... This question will be easy (a mere formality) *if* that writer has the relevant copy of Nemonymous to hand. In case of equal merit, preference will be given to those that can answer the most answers correctly.'

In this way, I think, the impetus to buy Nemonymous is given in a more subtle way."



However, I do not see the need to be subtle when responding to anonymous submissions. It is more difficult, I agree, when metaphorically 'eyeball to eyeball', say, with a friend or a big name.

Furthermore, how can someone logically submit anything to a magazine without knowing anything about it? All they need to do is buy or *borrow* a single copy with the method embodied in my original draft wording. It's about time, perhaps, that logic came into this process. There has been too much personalisation before ... too much name culture and mutuality. Anonymity at the editorial stage allows logic and fairness on both sides - and hopefully the best results for all parties. And logic entails having at least one copy of the magazine in one's possession at the point of submission, even if one hasn't bought it. I hereby promise to *lend* copies of Nemonymous to those who are interested enough to approach me. Otherwise it's like shooting in the dark. And potentially wasting everyone's time.

des
http://www.nemonymous.com





Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Kathy S.
Posted on Saturday, September 11, 2004 - 10:48 am:   

Des --
I agree with you. It seems to me that asking the questions BEFORE considering the subs will save you some time. Waiting for the next round does not serve this purpose. Having said that, if any of the US submitters want to borrow my copies of Nemo, they are welcome to do so. I'll even mail them at my own expense.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

des
Posted on Saturday, September 11, 2004 - 10:53 am:   

Thanks, Kathy. That's a very generous offer. des
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Kathy S.
Posted on Saturday, September 11, 2004 - 11:22 am:   

Aw, shucks, Des, my pleasure. I really like just about everything you've selected for Nemo. Of course, I'm also being selfish, since I plan on subbing in the future. Feel free to repost my offer elsewhere (veils&piques, TTA etc). My e-mail for the interested parties is katsedia at hotmail dot com.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Carole C
Posted on Saturday, September 11, 2004 - 11:44 am:   

Hi Des,

I'm not advocating 'not reading a copy of the magazine' - as I agree that it *is* a good idea to read the magazine - however sometimes that is not possible. For various reasons - maybe the magazine is difficult to get hold of, maybe the writer has so many magazines on subscription already they cannot afford it, etc etc.

Therefore, I think it's going too far to actually question people who submit work!

I agree with the point you are making in principle - however in practice I think it just would seem kind of offputting!
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Brendan
Posted on Saturday, September 11, 2004 - 11:46 am:   

I dont know. I do think people should stock up on Nemonymous, fill the cupboards and fridge and basement too, but...

On a very general level, I will have to admit to not buying most of the magazines I submit to. Partly because I get copies for free if they publish my stuff, but also partly because I am really not sure about how much it matters to the writer.

When I first started submitting material to magazines I would spend hours at the NY public library studying back issues and trying to direct my subs to where I thought they fit. I submitted about 100 stories to different magazines. Not one of them were accepted.

Since then I have formed the practice of simply reading the magazines guidelines and trying more or less to adhere to them and I don't have a big problem getting stuff accepted.

I guess is what it comes down to is that I don't think the burden of supporting a magazine should be on the writer. And when I do read in guidelines such things as "people who have not bothered to study an issue should not even think of submitting" ... well. I don't submit. I also don't bother buying the magazine.

Of course, I might just be a very bad person!
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Simon
Posted on Saturday, September 11, 2004 - 12:12 pm:   

To use writers such as Jay Lake and Greg Beatty as an example, I think some writers submit to over 50 different magazines a year. If you count in Lit Journals in paperback format that cost $10+, they'd potentially be paying $300-$500 a year just in sample issues for magazines that they may or may not be accepted into. From a business standpoint, this wouldn't be a very good moneymaking tactic for a profession that doesn't generate much money in the first place (short story writing).

I remember this one print zine--I don't remember its name--that had in its online guidelines links to stories online that the editors had liked to give the writer an idea of what they were looking for. Perhaps this idea could be used with your magazine?

I understand the point of what you're doing, and I kind of feel bad for disagreeing with it, but I think you'll be limiting your submission pile by a whole lot if you place this rule in your guidelines, since I would venture to guess that the majority of writers don't read the magazine before submitting.

Des, if I remember correctly, you've had 1,500 stories published in your lifetime. Please don't take this as accusation, but rather as an example, but did you purchase and read every single one of those magazines before submitting?

Heh, with my luck, you'll reply to this saying that yes, you did read all of them, in which I'll feel like a horse's ass. :-)
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

des
Posted on Saturday, September 11, 2004 - 12:31 pm:   

Des, if I remember correctly, you've had 1,500 stories published in your lifetime. Please don't take this as accusation, but rather as an example, but did you purchase and read every single one of those magazines before submitting?

*************

No, I didn't. You're right. But I tried to do so and I ought to have done better than I did. Des

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Sam
Posted on Saturday, September 11, 2004 - 12:34 pm:   

You are not a bad person. After reading the slush blog at Amazing wherein the editors speculated about mandating subscriptions before considering submissions, I cheerfully crossed them from my list. They never seriously entertained the notion, but nonetheless...

I heartily endorse subscribing to magazines--common sense dictates readers and creators do what they can to support their favored magazines.

However, contributors are supporting the publication. No writers--no magazine. Demands that submittors subscribe to a magazine are tantamount to charging reading fees.

Des has expressed a desire that submittors be familiar with the nature of Nemo to reduce his editorial stress. Nothing wrong with that. The downside--as he stated--is the inevitability of missing out on a great story.

Also, limiting the talent pool to the few people who have read Nemo vs the sea of skilled writers who might be interested in submitting after hearing about Nemo seems to blunt the supposed mission of the endeavor.


Respectfully,

Sam
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Brendan
Posted on Saturday, September 11, 2004 - 12:38 pm:   

I would like to add:

When I submitted the story which was published in Nemo 3. I had not previously read Nemonymous. I liked the concept, but I had two reasons for not reading it:

1) I was absolutely broke.

2) I was very busy reading old Greek and Latin authors.

I submitted my story and you printed it, so you must have liked it.

If I had been required to read the magazine before hand, the story would not have been published, for better or worse. But these things are worth considering.

There is a certain type of writer who just does not like to conform to regulations, and this type automatically gets turned off by these kind of stringent rules.

So I think Nemo needs to ask itself whether it really wants to receive submissions from only the goody-goody type writers who buy their sample copy, study it, reflect, and then submit accordingly - or the entire gamut of writers . . . the depressed monomaniacs who can barely get up enough courage to lick a stamp, let alone order a sample copy!
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

des
Posted on Saturday, September 11, 2004 - 12:45 pm:   

1) I was absolutely broke.

*************

I have offered to lend copies (not for the first time). And so has someone now in USA.
But I agree, Brendan (& Sam), with your thrust. This is a very delicate subject. I suggesteed my (soon to be notorious) *draft* guidelines above, only because I thought I could do so -- for the first time in literary history -- because of the insulation of anononymous submissions and the success I felt this system had with Nemo~4.

des
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Brendan
Posted on Saturday, September 11, 2004 - 12:50 pm:   

I realise that you offered to lend copies, which is quite nice. But why not offer to lend them anyhow without requiring someone answer a quesion?

It just seems to me that there are already so many rules in the world . . . And the Nemo experience seems like it should be liberating . . . which I thought was the original idea in a sense . . .
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

des
Posted on Saturday, September 11, 2004 - 01:10 pm:   

I realise that you offered to lend copies, which is quite nice. But why not offer to lend them anyhow without requiring someone answer a quesion?
***********

Well, yes, but, surely, as they're anonymous submissions (from people who have bought the mag, borrowed the mag from me or others, or haven't got it at all), the question (a formality) will still be necessary.
des
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Brendan
Posted on Saturday, September 11, 2004 - 01:17 pm:   

You mean necessary to confirm that the person has actually read Nemo?

I meant to drop the requirement all together.

I wouldn't keep harping on it, but I feel in all honesty that it will hurt that mag more than help. No one likes to feel forced into something. If it is a matter of the need to sell more copies, then the energy is better spent in marketing. If it is truly because you don't want to have to deal with unsuitable submissions . . . then make your guidelines more specific about the kinds of things you want to recieve. Also, as was previously mentioned, you could provide links to stories that you really like - or even put two or three Nemo stories from past issues on-line.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

des
Posted on Saturday, September 11, 2004 - 01:25 pm:   

Ok, it was bad idea.

But I still sense the logic of my draft wording above, i.e.:
When an anonymous submission is received, the sender will be asked four questions (one about each previous issue of Nemonymous), only *one* of which questions he or she needs to answer correctly. This question will be easy (a mere formality) *if* that writer has the relevant copy of Nemonymous to hand. If no question is answered correctly, the anonymous submission will be rejected without even reading it. It is considered that this rule is only practical when one is dealing with anonymous submissions. Nemonymous is not restricting submissions to subscribers since Nemonymous does not have subscribers. It is simply that anonymous story submissions will be rejected out of hand when the writers have failed to do their homework, i.e. bought or borrowed at least one edition of Nemonymous. This will ease the time factor of reading many stories that are unsuitable for Nemonymous, with a possible but acceptable downside risk of missing a great story submission.


And putting sample stories on the web, Brendan, I hope you agree does not give a feel of the mag. Its gestalt. Its literal feel.
des



Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

des
Posted on Saturday, September 11, 2004 - 01:36 pm:   

Hey, I have the solution! I'll make the questions multiple choice, three choices. If someone answers correctly by chance (without the benefit of the magazine in his or her possession), then, as a believer in synchronicity and serendipity, I will accept that their story was *meant* to be considered!

This solves all the objections and retains all that I wanted from the rule itself. Maybe...
des
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

KS
Posted on Saturday, September 11, 2004 - 01:38 pm:   

Des --
If I understood Brendan's objection correctly, he did not like the very presence of any rules. Your solution does not seem to address this issue.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Brendan
Posted on Saturday, September 11, 2004 - 01:46 pm:   

Well, if you are going to put three questions, then don't have them depend on if the person has read the mag. I don't object to the three questions, I object to the fact that they show a preference for a person who is studious enough to have done their homework over the person who simply wrote a good story.

I think submissions should be judged on the writing in the submission, not whether someone is good at answering multiple choice.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

des
Posted on Saturday, September 11, 2004 - 02:03 pm:   

I don't think you're in the spirit of this, Brendan. ;-)

I've already conceded it may be a bad idea, but one I may still go with - to see what happens. These are uncharted waters. Nemonymous has always been in uncharted waters.

And I don't think it's as simple as:
I think submissions should be judged on the writing in the submission, not whether someone is good at answering multiple choice.

It's more complex. Based on respect and synchronicity and belief. And, yes,
And the Nemo experience seems like it should be liberating . . . which I thought was the original idea in a sense . . .

And, often, the greatest liberation for me has been writing a sonnet with strict rhyming and scansion rules.
des
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

des
Posted on Saturday, September 11, 2004 - 02:27 pm:   

No writers--no magazine. Demands that submittors subscribe to a magazine are tantamount to charging reading fees.

***************

One point above I missed earlier (from Sam).

In the Small Press, of which Nemonymous is part, in my experience and instinct, readers and writers are the same people.
des
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

des
Posted on Saturday, September 11, 2004 - 02:31 pm:   

I also agree that submitters being forced to subscribe is tantamount to reading fees. My proposal was quite different. And quite new. Based on and eased by new techniques of anonymous submissions and lending-facilities that Nemonymous has already tried.
des
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Carole C
Posted on Saturday, September 11, 2004 - 02:34 pm:   

Des - I was actually going to buy all four copies of Nemonymous (from Cold Tonnage) - but that was because I think it sounds like a great magazine I would enjoy reading, rather than buying it because I want to submit (I probably won't submit).

I think you *have* got respect etc - from sticking to your principles of anonymous submissions, and from publishing quality fiction.

I just think this whole idea of the questions actually goes against the idea of anonymity - now you are saying that the quality of the story actually doesn't count as much as it did.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

des
Posted on Saturday, September 11, 2004 - 02:41 pm:   

Of course, the quality of the story is paramount.

But without symbiosis, we'll eventually have no Nemonymous at all.

I'm simply proposing that that symbiosis be syncromeshed by other brainstorming considerations.


And thanks for thinking about buying the Nemo Quartet.
des
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Sam
Posted on Saturday, September 11, 2004 - 02:59 pm:   

Dear Des,

"In the Small Press, of which Nemonymous is part, in my experience and instinct, readers and writers are the same people."

That's an interesting thesis--and one that I am not really in a position to dispute or endorse without more investigation. Although, that suggests a rather grim reality--one allegedly faced by many poetry periodicals, wherein the audience and contributors are one and the same...a terribly anemic diet, I fear.

Assuming your thesis is on the money, I humbly propose it is even more important to broaden the base of potential submittors/readers, not institute policies to the reverse.

In any event, editorial prerogative trumps enjoinders from the peanut gallery--I exhort you to continue blazing this literary path.

Respectfully,
Sam
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

des
Posted on Sunday, September 12, 2004 - 01:03 am:   

Sorry, everyone, if I was a bit obstreperous last night. Your feedback so far has been valuable and will be taken into account. Fascinating subject, though, don't you think?

Fundamentally, and having slept on it, I still see my latest 'question' idea as (or symbolic of) a practical syncromeshing of a reader-writer-publisher-story-and-artefact symbiosis.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Brendan
Posted on Sunday, September 12, 2004 - 02:18 am:   

I didn't think you were obstreperous. But I do think the sort of symbioses you are talking about can only really occur naturally. And to a large degree it has already occured naturally in Nemo.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

des
Posted on Sunday, September 12, 2004 - 02:24 am:   

Thanks, Brendan. A bit like the marvellous 'Frog's Pool' in Nemo~4 ?
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

des
Posted on Sunday, September 12, 2004 - 03:08 am:   

Just noticed that the old re-published story just added to Night Shades share of Weirdmonger Wheel here:
http://www.nightshadebooks.com/discus/messages/201/2754.html?1094973338#POST5163 5

is quite coincidentally relevant to the symbiosis... !

des
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

des
Posted on Friday, November 19, 2004 - 09:06 am:   

Proud to announce that NEMONYMOUS~5 will have the following great nameless authors appearing within its pages:













Order your copy now because with such a line-up, there will be enormous demand. I can say this even though I've not chosen any stories yet from the many submissions I'm still receiving.
des
http://www.nemonymous.com

Add Your Message Here
Post:
Username: Posting Information:
This is a private posting area. Only registered users and moderators may post messages here.
Password:
Options: Enable HTML code in message
Automatically activate URLs in message
Action:

Topics | Last Day | Last Week | Tree View | Search | User List | Help/Instructions | Log Out | Edit Profile | Register