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

Salon Fantastique

Topics | Last Day | Last Week | Tree View | Search | User List | Help/Instructions | Log Out | Edit Profile | Register
Night Shade Message Boards » Datlow, Ellen » Salon Fantastique « Previous Next »

  Thread Last Poster Posts Pages Last Post
  Start New Thread        

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

Ellen Datlow
Posted on Monday, May 01, 2006 - 05:16 pm:   

Well, I'm almost in the home stretch of my line edits and Terri Windling is working on the introduction to this non-theme, all original fantasy anthology edited by me and Terri. One of the contributors just noted that the book is mentioned in Thunder's Mouth online catalog, as well as on Amazon as a fall title. Yikes! I thought it was coming out in 07. No wonder our editor is in such a rush. Book will be handed in, in a week and a half!

Table of Contents will be announced when book is handed in. But a number of folk on the BBs here are in it :-)
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

PM
Posted on Monday, May 01, 2006 - 06:15 pm:   

Amazon has it listed for September.

Don't keep 'em waiting :-)

Any anectodes to share?
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ellen Datlow
Posted on Monday, May 01, 2006 - 09:04 pm:   

Yes, I saw that.
We're figuring out the order of stories now. (although we're waiting for one story from someone who will not be named).
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Kelly Christopher Shaw
Posted on Tuesday, May 02, 2006 - 06:49 am:   

I'm really looking forward to seeing the contents of this. If the synopsis on Amazon is true, and the collection will contain stories by Link, Shepard, Ford, and others, this may be the antho to beat in '06.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ellen Datlow
Posted on Tuesday, May 02, 2006 - 08:37 am:   

Well, there are some authors who are listed there who are NOT in the book. Susanna Clarke was working on something for us but has been sick in bed since before December. There's no Lanagan either. However, there are Ford, Shepard, and (we're praying she's in time) Link, among others :-)
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Kelly Christopher Shaw
Posted on Tuesday, May 02, 2006 - 10:44 am:   

I'll cross my fingers for the Link. Thanks.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Jonathan Strahan
Posted on Tuesday, May 02, 2006 - 07:49 pm:   

Hi Ellen - Great news about Salon Fantastique! Though the sudden deadline change would freak me out a little, I'm really excited to see the book coming out. Can't wait to see it and Coyote Road. And, now that Kelly's finished her enormous novella for me, hopefully she'll be able to get your story in on time.

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

Ellen Datlow
Posted on Tuesday, May 02, 2006 - 08:43 pm:   

Hey Jonathan. I'm kind of glad it's coming out this year too, as it means I have two books coming out now: YBFH #19 and Salon Fantastique--so I won't be completely forgotten and ignored quite yet :-)
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Kelly Christopher Shaw
Posted on Wednesday, May 03, 2006 - 07:22 am:   

"...now that Kelly's finished her enormous novella for me."

Jonathan, you can't throw that out and not share more Ė what collection is this "enormous" Kelly Link novella for? Thanks.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Richard Parks
Posted on Wednesday, May 03, 2006 - 08:04 am:   

"I'm kind of glad it's coming out this year too, as it means I have two books coming out now: YBFH #19 and Salon Fantastique--so I won't be completely forgotten and ignored quite yet :-)"

Oh, like _that's_ going to happen. :-)
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ellen Datlow
Posted on Wednesday, May 03, 2006 - 09:21 am:   

Hey, Richard. Editors come and go over the years (sniff) but thank you for warming my cold editorial heart :-)
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Jonathan Strahan
Posted on Thursday, May 04, 2006 - 11:25 pm:   

Hey Ellen. I really like the cover for Salon Fantastique. I see they've just put it up on the Publishers Group West website.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ellen Datlow
Posted on Monday, May 15, 2006 - 08:20 am:   

Ok, we've handed in the mss to our publisher and here's the TOC (there still might be a last minute addition if Kelly finishes her story):
La Fťe Verte Delia Sherman
Dust Devil on a Quiet Street Richard Bowes
To Measure the Earth Jedediah Berry
A Grey and Soundless Tide Catherynne M. Valente
Concealment Shoes Marly Youmans
The Guardian of the Egg Christopher Barzak
My Travels With Al-Qaeda Lavie Tidhar
Chandail Peter Beagle
Down the Wall Greer Gilman
Femaville 29 Paul Di Filippo
Nottamun Town Gregory Maguire
Yours, Etc. Gavin Grant
The Mask of í67 David Prill
The Night Whiskey Jeffrey Ford
The Lepidopterist Lucius Shepard
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

PM
Posted on Monday, May 15, 2006 - 02:33 pm:   

Hope Homeland Security doesn't overreact to the TOC :-) tick TOC, tick TOC...

Looking forward to vocabulary building with Shepard.

Crossing fingers that Kelly makes it cross the line.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

PM
Posted on Monday, May 15, 2006 - 09:58 pm:   

6700 words you say...maybe he's savin' up for Playboy :-)

I'm sure that this will be an enjoyable volume and look forward to it.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Kelly Christopher Shaw
Posted on Thursday, June 01, 2006 - 01:44 pm:   

Just wondering if Link submitted her story in time to be included in Salon Fantastique? Thanks.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ellen Datlow
Posted on Sunday, June 04, 2006 - 12:57 am:   

Afraid not.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Kelly Christopher Shaw
Posted on Monday, June 05, 2006 - 06:34 am:   

Too bad. Thanks.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Jennifer Ruth Corry
Posted on Saturday, August 05, 2006 - 04:53 pm:   

Wow, I can't believe I'm actually on the same discussion board as Ellen Datlow and Sharyn November. Ms. Datlow, I've enjoyed you and Terry Windling's fantastic work for almost two years now and I'm a voracious collector of it. Ms. November, I've just recently discovered your brilliant "Firebirds" anthologies and look eagerly forward to the next one. Just wanted to say thank you both for the awesome books you've put together! You and all the authors in your collections have made reading an even greater joy than it already was.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ellen Datlow
Posted on Saturday, August 05, 2006 - 08:54 pm:   

Jennifer, my first reaction is "did my mom contact you?" (just kidding). Thanks so much. I hope you continue to enjoy the anthologies I edit. I'll have three originals coming out in 2007 and one guest edited issue of Subterranean Magazine.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Jennifer Ruth Corry
Posted on Tuesday, August 08, 2006 - 10:10 pm:   

I can't believe I'm on the same board as Ellen Datlow and Sharyn November! Ms. Datlow, I've been enjoying you and Terri Windling's brilliant work for the past two years and am a voracious collector. Ms. November, I just recently discovered your fantastic Firebirds series and eagerly await the third anthology. I just wanted to thank you both for your wonderful work. You've made reading an even greater joy than it already was :-)
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Jennifer Ruth Corry
Posted on Thursday, August 10, 2006 - 01:20 pm:   

I definetly will continue to enjoy them. I'm already looking forward to the subject of interest, Salon Fantastique. Thanks for listing the table of contents, as it's nice to know which authors to look forward to. Too bad Link couldn't make it.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Jennifer Ruth Corry
Posted on Thursday, August 17, 2006 - 06:05 pm:   

It's a shame this board didn't post my first message on time; I thought it hadn't been posted at all, so when I submitted my second post, I made it almost identical to the first. (I'm a bit slow with computers, can you tell?)
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ellen Datlow
Posted on Thursday, August 17, 2006 - 10:06 pm:   

Jennifer,
Don't worry about it.
Hopefully Sharyn will come back over here one of these days to see the nice things you said about her work too. :-)
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

sharyn november
Posted on Saturday, August 26, 2006 - 04:45 pm:   

haha, i did. and thank you so much! but i need to edit both ellen and terri's and jonathan's books. so, back to it.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Jennifer Ruth Corry
Posted on Thursday, September 07, 2006 - 06:24 pm:   

Well, good luck to both of you with your work and thanks again for the great books :-) I'll be counting the days till Salon Fantastique and the next Firebirds anthology hit the stores.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ellen Datlow
Posted on Thursday, September 07, 2006 - 06:38 pm:   

Salon Fantastique should be available any minute. I was told by my publisher that review copies have been sent out, although I haven't seen my own copies yet.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Daniel Ausema
Posted on Thursday, September 07, 2006 - 08:49 pm:   

This sounds like a great anthology! I look forward to getting my hands on a copy.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Jamie Rosen
Posted on Friday, September 08, 2006 - 07:24 am:   

Ellen,

There is, in fact, a review of the Salon in the August issue of Locus, under the "by Divers Hands" review column.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ellen Datlow
Posted on Friday, September 08, 2006 - 07:37 am:   

Hi Jamie,
I saw that review. I'd sent the stories out early to Rich Horton way before the book was finished. The book was produced very quickly, and there was no time for advance reader's copies/galleys. But we're still awaiting our Publishers Weekly and Kirkus reviews--the trade reviews.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Nathan Ballingrud
Posted on Friday, September 08, 2006 - 05:32 pm:   

It did seem like it was produced very quickly, especially compared to Inferno's target date. Was this one put on the fast track? Or is Thunder's Mouth just generally faster to the printer?
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ellen Datlow
Posted on Friday, September 08, 2006 - 10:36 pm:   

John Oakes had never commissioned an original antho before and I had to beg him to give us enough time to edit it. We still didn't have enough time...in my opinion. We could have used a couple more months. (sigh).
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Kelly Christopher Shaw
Posted on Saturday, September 09, 2006 - 07:02 am:   

"I'd sent the stories out early to Rich Horton way before the book was finished."

Maybe this is why he failed to mention Shepard's story in his review.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ellen Datlow
Posted on Saturday, September 09, 2006 - 04:55 pm:   

He received the entire mss.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Kelly Christopher Shaw
Posted on Saturday, September 09, 2006 - 09:34 pm:   

I won't let him off the hook then: How can you not even mention a Lucius Shepard story?
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ellen Datlow
Posted on Saturday, September 09, 2006 - 09:43 pm:   

Every once in awhile I doesn't mention a story in an issue of a mag or in an antho...not sure why...
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

PM
Posted on Saturday, September 09, 2006 - 10:55 pm:   

Shepard's a selling point for me but I wouldn't think the omission was intentional...
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Gordon Van Gelder
Posted on Sunday, September 10, 2006 - 02:57 pm:   

Rich Horton has said before that he doesn't usually like Laird Barron's work and that Laird's stories remind him of Lucius Shepard's.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Kelly Christopher Shaw
Posted on Sunday, September 10, 2006 - 03:52 pm:   

If I'm remembering correctly, Horton also gave the Trujillo collection a lukewarm review. To each their own -- but a Shepard story is a Shepard story, and a reviewer has an obligation to comment on it, positively or negatively.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ellen Datlow
Posted on Sunday, September 10, 2006 - 05:45 pm:   

Kelly, as much as I love Lucius's work, I don't think a reviewer is obliged to mention every story in an anthology or magazine.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

PM
Posted on Sunday, September 10, 2006 - 08:53 pm:   

I agree in spirit with Kelly and in practicality with Ellen.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ellen Datlow
Posted on Sunday, September 10, 2006 - 09:31 pm:   

;-)
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Lucius
Posted on Sunday, September 10, 2006 - 09:43 pm:   

Rich Horton is a notorious firp, i.e. a guy who bites his fart bubbles in the bath tub and then takes himself way too seriously.

That could explain it. That, and the fact that he's an idiot.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Sean Wallace
Posted on Monday, September 11, 2006 - 08:19 am:   

It probably has to do more with space constraints, as he told me that was the reason for a short review of Fantasy Magazine 4. I don't have a problem with that, at all, given the circumstances, and there's no particular reason why any specific author should be mentioned, over any other, really. That's life :p
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Kelly Christopher Shaw
Posted on Monday, September 11, 2006 - 10:19 am:   

In theory, I completely agree Ė Rich Horton doesn't have to touch Shepard's story. In reality, as a subscriber of Locus, the valuability of their magazine is only as strong as their reviewers, and the books those reviewers decide to cover. For me, as that trusty subscriber, the magazine loses value and the reviewer credibility, when a Shepard story isn't tackled head on. I mean, come on, we're not talking about a newbie here Ė Shepard's a frickin' genre establishment unto himself. And his work demands to be covered. IMO. :-)
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Scott Benenati
Posted on Monday, September 11, 2006 - 12:09 pm:   

I agree with Kelly. How can you ignore Shepard?
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Lucius
Posted on Monday, September 11, 2006 - 12:36 pm:   

I don't really have a problem with it either. If Rich Horton doesn't want to review my stories, it's no skin off my ass. It's not as if he's Jonathan Yardley.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ellen Datlow
Posted on Monday, September 11, 2006 - 01:33 pm:   

I received a copy of it today and Gavin Grant says he didn't get his contributor's copy yet, but did get a review copy....So keep watching the skies!
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Jamie Rosen
Posted on Monday, September 11, 2006 - 02:16 pm:   

But if it's space considerations, the reviewer would have to cut someone else's storiy from the review. If you're going to put any credence into the review itself, you shouldn't second guess the reviewer's choice of which stories to mention -- otherwise you might as well skip the review entirely.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Bruce Chrumka
Posted on Monday, September 11, 2006 - 02:59 pm:   

I noticed from the ToC that Mr. Shepard's 'The Lepidopterist' has the coveted last position in the anthology which implies that it's a particularly strong story, in what looks like a killer line-up. Odd Rich Horton overlooked it.

Mr. Horton also missed commenting on stories by Gregory Maguire, David Prill, Peter Beagle, Greer Gilman and Catherynne M. Valente, so he's an equal-opportunity ignorer. Looking forward to this one.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

PM
Posted on Monday, September 11, 2006 - 03:22 pm:   

The average reader isn't going to know what the fuck is going on. Whether Horton hears the Who or whatever if/when the reviewer is gargling due to political/personal preferences spare me the spit.

As a reviewer either identify those conflicts or potential conflicts of interest or recuse yourself.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Nathan Ballingrud
Posted on Monday, September 11, 2006 - 05:35 pm:   

Jeez, usually I see a reviewer catch hell for what he did write; I think this is the first time I've seen one catch it for what he didn't. I dig Lucius's work as much as the next person, but I think we can all agree that anyone who writes reviews is offering a subjective viewpoint. So he doesn't like one writer or another; who cares? In this he is like all of us. Let him be.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Kelly Christopher Shaw
Posted on Monday, September 11, 2006 - 06:03 pm:   

Nathan: In a way, I can see if you're an editor or writer that this issue would be trivial. However, I am neither (at least in the genre community). I'm just a reader who spends a good deal of cash on books and magazines, and I have expectations of such products. One of the expectations I have from reviewers in Locus is that they cover the writers I'm interested in. When said readers are no longer covered, the magazine no longer has value for me. So, since I'm spending my money on Lucus, I, the consumer, care what writers a reviewer likes or dislikes. It's important to me that a reviewer's opinions are bare, or else their opinion has no value to me.

OK, I killed this to death. Enough from me.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

PM
Posted on Monday, September 11, 2006 - 06:10 pm:   

Sometimes one has to smite the swine...but I prefer to purr with the kittens.

The question of whether it's pettiness, space restraints, or something altogether different is important...especially for a publication which folk turn to for reviews. Or Datlow's photos :-)

I would assume that there are at least a few who actually read the reviews and use that information to influence/determine what to read. Those readers are done a disservice by a reviewer who's unduly, whether positively or negatively, influenced.

Folk should care about whether reviewers are doing their job.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ellen Datlow
Posted on Monday, September 11, 2006 - 06:54 pm:   

Yo PM! Are you saying I leave out the photos of people I don't like? ;-) Actually, if I get really awful photos of someone, I try not to post em...but everyone of course has their own opinion of how they look in photos. I hate most of myself and so prefer to take my own--that way I can dumpt the ones I hate before they're ever seen.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ellen Datlow
Posted on Monday, September 11, 2006 - 07:02 pm:   

I hope that one of the other reviewers will review the book in Locus. And perhaps SF Weekly will review it. I've gotten them a copy.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

PM
Posted on Monday, September 11, 2006 - 07:15 pm:   

Ellen, at least you're willing to admit your agenda :-)

I'd distinguish wanting to look good in a picture from unduly attempting to influence a review. Unless the picture is intended to be humorous or humiliate [or another specific purpose] we tend to intuit that the best pictures available were used.

I think that we can all agree that reviewing a large anthology with a multitude of contributors presents its own challenges...which brings me back to the "if it can't fit in the space allotted" expand it online thought...
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ellen Datlow
Posted on Tuesday, September 12, 2006 - 02:54 pm:   

Rave review by Nick Gevers in the next Locus--He mentions Lucius's (and most of the other stories) in glowing terms which I won't repeat here but have sent to the individual authors mentioned in the review.

Some primo quotes:
The newest original anthology from Ellen Datlow and Terri Windling, Salon Fantastique, could well be their best so far...Liberated from any imposed agenda, the contributors have excelled themselves; but given the huge innate strength of the line-up, they might well have done so in any case.


Itís late in 2006, and Salon Fantastique looks very much like clinching the title of Anthology of the Year.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Sean Wallace
Posted on Wednesday, September 13, 2006 - 05:39 am:   

I'm sure if Rich had a chance he would have reviewed the entire anthology. Take it up with the Locus reviews editor. Don't ever assume that it's ever up to the reviewer, particularly since it's Locus that determines what goes in or what doesn't go in, just like any other professional magazine :p
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Scott Benenati
Posted on Wednesday, September 13, 2006 - 09:01 am:   

Sean, are you advocating not holding a reviewer accountable for what she/he writes? I find it hard to picture the editor's at Locus telling Horton, "Just pick a few stories out of there, Rich." Both Nick Gevers and Gary Wolfe usually tackle every story in a magazine or short story collection. Horton skips stories continually, on a monthly basis. Maybe he deems them not worthy to write about, maybe he doesn't have time to read every story (in which case he shouldn't be writing a review), but to blame Locus seems absurd.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Sean Wallace
Posted on Wednesday, September 13, 2006 - 10:14 am:   

No, I expect any reviewer to focus on the stories that they liked and I think it's very tacky to take potshots at anyone simply because they decided not to review your favorite author. Sure, I don't understand why some reviewers don't make mention of some of my authors, but hey that's the way it goes, and I don't go around badmouthing reviewers because they decided to do so. This latest trend of going after reviewers, small press or professional, seems to be a very bad trend, and I'm simply surprised that it continues.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Jamie Rosen
Posted on Wednesday, September 13, 2006 - 10:16 am:   

I don't think the reviewer is obliged to provide the table of contents. It seems that many people are conflating reviews with advertisements -- the advertisement should be telling you who's in the book.

To carry these expectations further, a film reviewer should comment on every performance by every actor, and an art critic should comment on every painting in a given exhibit.

And to agree with Sean, speaking as a former reviewer myself, editors may not tell you what to review -- but they'll cut out what doesn't fit.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Sean Wallace
Posted on Wednesday, September 13, 2006 - 10:20 am:   

Nothing gets published in Locus without the approval of the reviews editor, Scott, just like any other professional magazine (or trade journal), all the way up to Booklist, Kirkus, Library Journal and Publishers Weekly. The ultimate responsibility lies with the magazine itself, not wholly with the paid reviewers. If you have a gripe, then take it up with Locus.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Kelly Christopher Shaw
Posted on Wednesday, September 13, 2006 - 10:46 am:   

"...it's very tacky to take potshots at anyone simply because they decided not to review your favorite author."

I don't think anyone's taking potshots here, merely expressing frustration at Horton's story selection. As a consumer of Locus and Horton's reviews, I have every right to express dissatisfaction with a deficient product (i.e. a review that fails to mention a new story by one of the genre's preemeinent writers).

And I don't believe for one second that the Locus reviewers do not have carte blanche in what stories and books they review. Why else would, quite freqently, the same book be reviewed multiple times by multiple reviewers?

Ellen: I look forward to reading Gevers's rave!
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ellen Datlow
Posted on Wednesday, September 13, 2006 - 11:07 am:   

Sean, I think you're wrong. Rich and Nick choose what they review and they choose how they review those items. I don't believe the overall editor cuts mentions of certain writers. In fact, the issue has been brought up before over the years--he often skips a story in a magazine or anthology. I just assume he had nothing special to say about that story or didn't care for it and didn't want to say so. It's no big deal.

I agree with Jamie that a reviewer is not responsible for mentioning every story/actor/piece of art etc. I certainly understand the disappointment that someone doesn't mention one's favorite writer (hey, I'm not happy when one of the stories I've published is ignored) but that's life--and reviewing.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Richard Parks
Posted on Wednesday, September 13, 2006 - 12:01 pm:   

I'd also point out that this is not a new thing. Back before Nick Gevers and Rich Horton started reviewing for Locus, Mark Kelly was the only short fiction reviewer, and he often skipped stories he either didn't like or didn't want to comment on for whatever reason.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

PM
Posted on Wednesday, September 13, 2006 - 12:42 pm:   

I don't think it's too much to ask why a reviewer omits a substantial chunk of an anthology.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Sean Wallace
Posted on Wednesday, September 13, 2006 - 12:45 pm:   

You should be asking your questions of the magazine, not the reviewer.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Brendan Connell
Posted on Wednesday, September 13, 2006 - 01:26 pm:   

Personally, I don't really like reviews of anthologies that simply go over ever single story. I am more interested in the antho as a whole. And all reviewers have their own tastes and styles of reviewing.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Kelly Christopher Shaw
Posted on Wednesday, September 13, 2006 - 01:56 pm:   

Sean: So the reviewer exists in a vacuum, exempt from any form of dialogue?
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Scott Benenati
Posted on Wednesday, September 13, 2006 - 02:16 pm:   

I think we'd all agree that it is imperative that we rigorously question our critics, especially in our age of information overload. This is a healthy sign. Shepard has a strong voice in our community and one of his stories in an anthology is a selling point for many of us. I definitely won't lose sleep over Horton's exclusion of the story, but it is telling. Like Ellen says, no big deal. But it is Horton's decision's to skip the story, not the venue's...unless you blame Locus for including his reviews at all (not meant to be a potshot :-) ).
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Bruce Chrumka
Posted on Wednesday, September 13, 2006 - 02:44 pm:   

Rich Horton did mention he thought the book was solid and 'top to bottom a fine effort' which implies he did like 'The Lepidopterist' and the other stories he neglected to mention. He also stated no single story jumped out at him like 'The Faery Handbag' from 'The Faery Reel'. [The one that did it for me wasn't Ms. Link's so much as 'The Annals of Eelin-ok' by Jeff Ford]. It just underscores the fact that you don't have to agree with a reviewer.

As someone who owns 21 of Lucius Shepard's books, I would've liked to have seen the story reviewed but frankly, I don't think it's a big deal. I'll pick up a copy of Salon Fantastique and keep my Locus subscription.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Jamie Rosen
Posted on Wednesday, September 13, 2006 - 02:53 pm:   

I personally don't give two whits about there being a Lucius Shepard story in a given anthology, and I don't think it's the reviewer's job to catalogue selling points.

I also don't think it would be as big an issue if Lucius hadn't chimed in with his 'firp' comment.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ellen Datlow
Posted on Wednesday, September 13, 2006 - 02:57 pm:   

PM,
He mentioned eleven of the fifteen stories.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Jamie Rosen
Posted on Wednesday, September 13, 2006 - 02:58 pm:   

Just to clarify, "two whits" is not me avoiding a curseword; I don't have feelings that strong on the matter -- I'm just utterly indifferent towards it.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Scott Benenati
Posted on Wednesday, September 13, 2006 - 04:05 pm:   

"I don't think it's the reviewer's job to catalogue selling points."

I agree with you Jamie, bad choice of words on my part.

Ellen, this anthology really looks cool. I remember hearing somewhere that Kelly Link missed the deadline, but the cover photo on amazon has her name on the front cover. Does she have a story included? Also, just out of curiousity, are any of the stories novellas?
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ellen Datlow
Posted on Wednesday, September 13, 2006 - 04:28 pm:   

Scott,
The cover on amazon is out of date. They should have the one on my website, which is what the book actually looks like
www.datlow.com
and scroll down the left side of the page. You can enlarge the picture a bit.

Kelly's not in it and there are a total of fifteen stories. No novellas. About five novelettes. The longest are by Peter Beagle and Delia Sherman--12,300 and 12,700 respectively.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Richard R. Horton
Posted on Wednesday, September 13, 2006 - 05:35 pm:   

For Chrissakes!

I have about 600 words max for Divers Hands reviews in Locus. Nick and others have more space for their regular columns. That's why I don't always mention every story -- there isn't room.

I mentioned the stories I thought best, and those I thought I might have something interesting to say about. I didn't think "The Lepidopterist" was the best story in the book -- I thought it fine work, in the middle or slightly above the middle of Shepard's range. Sometimes Shepard is plain brilliant (as in "Only Partly Here"). Sometimes he's not. This story, I thought, as I've said, decent work. But not among the very best in the book. And, also, and doubtless this is a failing of mine, not a story I had anything interesting to say about.

I am quite frankly astonished that I am getting criticized for something I didn't say. I am used (somewhat) to getting bitched at for a negative review -- and I've even gotten a complaint from an author (once) for a positive review. (I can't remember why -- maybe it wasn't positive enough.) And I've gotten complaints from people who think I praised a story that didn't deserve praise -- that's cool.

As for the notion that certain writers are sufficiently prominent that a reviewer has an obligation to mention their stories -- well, I can see where people are coming from there. Those are the stories most readers will be most curious about. But given space limitations that rule is hard to enforce. I would be grossly failing my obligations not to mention a cool story like Jedediah Berry's simply because Berry is not a well-known writer.

And of course every reader's list of the "essential" writers will be different. I have to admit I would find it hard not to mention a Kelly Link story ... but then, her stories, lately, always seem to be among the best in the books they appear in.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ellen Datlow
Posted on Wednesday, September 13, 2006 - 05:59 pm:   

Rich,
Thanks for coming by and explaining yourself (which you certainly didn't have to do).

Now everyone make nice, please.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Kelly Christopher Shaw
Posted on Wednesday, September 13, 2006 - 06:07 pm:   

Thanks Richard. Since I count contemporary Shepard up there with contemporary Link, I found it hard to fathom that a review didn't even mention Shepard's new story. It would have been like someone reviewing The Faery Reel and not mentioning The Faery Handbag. So, because of this oversight, your review of Salon Fantastique was severely lacking for me. (Keep in mind, I haven't yet read the 'The Lepidopterist.') And, even though you do not count Shepard as one of the preeminent genre writers, surely you must at least be aware of his status in the genre and the interest many Locus readers have in his work?
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Kelly Christopher Shaw
Posted on Wednesday, September 13, 2006 - 06:08 pm:   

Ellen: Sorry, didn't see your post. Hope my previous post is nice. :-)
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Richard R. Horton
Posted on Wednesday, September 13, 2006 - 06:30 pm:   

Kelly -- the one point I want to make is that, for me, "The Faery Handbag" was such a brilliant story that if it was written by, oh, Lionel Fanthorpe I would have had to mention it. For me -- and others may certainly disagree -- "The Lepidopterist" is not as good. But do read it -- it's not bad, by any means.

Bruce -- "The Annals of Eelin-Ok" (as my reviews should show) -- ranked nearly with "The Faery Handbag" for me among the stories from The Faery Reel.

From a purist point of view, I would read and review each story anonymously (as with the magazine Nenonymous) -- I don't actually think it's a good idea for readers or reviewers to prejudge stories based on who wrote them. But I'm not stupid -- I know I do approach some stories with greater anticipation because particular authors wrote them, and I know readers buy books because certain authors appear. But, as somebody suggested, its not my job as a reviewer to tick off the book's selling points. You can see those on Amazon, or by looking at the TOC. It's my job to report what I found special, or interesting, or unexpected (including, perhaps, unexpectedly bad).
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

PM
Posted on Wednesday, September 13, 2006 - 06:48 pm:   

I appreciate that Mr. Horton has stopped by and made his helpful remarks.

Many of my comments were aimed at the situation in general (publications and reviewers) and I'd encourage both to break the "space barrior"

Perhaps it is a radical notion to suggest that in a multiple author anthology that every author deserves at least a thunk. I think not...
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Brendan Connell
Posted on Wednesday, September 13, 2006 - 11:04 pm:   

PM - But have you ever read the reviews where every author in a 12, 15 or 20 author antho are mentioned? They always read more like listsn than reviews to me. I would rather read a few intereesting comments about 3 stories and a summation of the antho as a whole than a whole long list. Of the antho's I have been in, so many of the reviews have either not mentioned my stories or simply given a one-line synopsis of the plot. At the same time other reviewers sometimes pick out the stories and talk about them. But personally, having a story not mentioned, or having a one-line synopsis are basically the same thing.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

PM
Posted on Wednesday, September 13, 2006 - 11:27 pm:   

and if someone is interested in reading your stories it makes it much more difficult if your contributions aren't even getting a peep.

I can respect that the authors and even THE editor(s) are unphased by the omissions.

I'm not suggesting that all the stories be allocated the same amount of space.

I'm suggesting that if space limitations really is the issue that this restriction be lifted.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Brendan Connell
Posted on Thursday, September 14, 2006 - 12:08 am:   

I think a review without space limitations is not really a review. Then you are getting into the realm of essay/criticism, which is a slightly different thing - for maybe a different venue. Personally, I have liked the Horton reviews I have read. I haven't necessarily agreed with all the opinions - but that is a given. Personally, I think he adds value to the venue his reviews are in and not the other way around. Maybe people should read the antho, and then say if they agree with the way he covered it?
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

des lewis
Posted on Thursday, September 14, 2006 - 12:31 am:   

From a purist point of view, I would read and review each story anonymously (as with the magazine Nenonymous) -- I don't actually think it's a good idea for readers or reviewers to prejudge stories based on who wrote them.
**********************

Thanks for the mention of "Nemonymous", Mr Horton. I've found this discussion interesting. Reviews are so different from each other (their angle of approach, space available, thoroughness, experience and/or taste of reviewer etc), it's impossible to generalise. In fact, with so many imponderables, this leads to many questions about the nature of reviews in themselves, I feel. But I have noticed that reviews of Nemo - over the years - have generally tended to be thorough and include each story. I don't know whether this is because the reviewer doesn't know the authors before writing the review.
des
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Nathan Ballingrud
Posted on Thursday, September 14, 2006 - 05:15 am:   

Life the space restriction, PM? If you do it for one reviewer you'll have to do it for the rest. How about those reviews of all the year's best anthos that come out about this time? How about that new collection of short stories by Author X that just came out? Shouldn't every story be touched on there too? The reality is that when you're dealing with print publications, you can't lift the space restrictions. Writers have to adhere to a fairly strict word count so that the story or review can fit into the magazine much like a puzzle piece. Editors have to take into consideration other stories and interviews and articles -- as well as page count, production cost, and ad space.

Hell, even in fiction anthologies word count comes into play. I've heard some year's best editors lament not being able to include stories they thought were deserving just because they didn't have the space. Fiction writers are given word count limits all the time. As long as you're dealing with the print medium, you're going to have limits which must be honored.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ellen Datlow
Posted on Thursday, September 14, 2006 - 10:56 am:   

I will be talking about and Richard Bowes will be reading from Salon Fantastique, on the Hour of the Wolf radio show this weekend.

It's bright and (very) early: Saturday morning 5-7 am the 16th if anyone's up that early. It can also be listened to afterwards on the WBAI website.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

PM
Posted on Thursday, September 14, 2006 - 04:41 pm:   

If a reviewer wants to be comprehensive they can choose to be. We do have this thing called the Internet and last time I checked Locus had a website. I appreciate that Mr. Horton was willing to expand upon his review.

But I think that some folk are a bit "settled in" with how things have been in the past.

I can't buy the "space limitation" argument and hopefully I've demonstrated why it's more of a choice now...Mr. Horton made that choice.

Looking forward to listening to the WBAI program.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Jonathan Strahan
Posted on Thursday, September 14, 2006 - 04:44 pm:   

I've only just come across this discussion, having spent the last month traveling, but I'm happy to discus any of the details of how we approach reviews and reviewing at Locus.

I would say though, that I think our reviewers typically do a great job, and that I was happy with our cover of Salon Fantastique, which clearly is a major book and deserved two reviews in the magazine.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ellen Datlow
Posted on Thursday, September 14, 2006 - 06:08 pm:   

Jonathan, I was pleased as punch to get the two reviews.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Richard Bowes
Posted on Thursday, September 14, 2006 - 09:05 pm:   

Multiple reviews increase an individual story's chance of getting noticed. Magazine and especially anthology releases are kind of a stampede with as many as thirty stories vying for critical and reader attention.

I thought the May 2002 F&SF was the strongest issue of a magazine I'd ever seen let alone appeared in. Stories from that issue were on half a dozen short lists and made it into several "best of" anthologies. Ford's Creation won the WFA. But even with that kind of recognition, a couple of excellent stories got overlooked.

The Faery Reel was a great anthology. The Ford and Link entries deserved all the attention they got. But very strong stories that might have won more attention in other surroundings kind of got lost.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

PM
Posted on Thursday, September 14, 2006 - 11:23 pm:   

Looks like Locus is using an 8 page signature. If I'm correct then realistically one or two pages couldn't be added. It would be a minimum of eight.

I'll pose the question to Mr. Strahan. Do you have a theoretical objection to all the authors in an anthology being covered in a review? If there is no objection and the reviewer also does not have an objection what can be done to resolve the "space limitation" issue.

If it can't go into print I've suggested putting it online. Thoughts?
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Brendan Connell
Posted on Friday, September 15, 2006 - 12:15 am:   

PM -

But it is crazy (or so it seems to me), for reviewers to be obliged to comment on every story in an anthology. What if the reviewer doesn't have anything much to say about a story? Are they still obliged to comment on it? It seems to me that anyone who would like to write a review could do so themselves - their are certainly plenty of on-line venues that will publish them - and leave others to review as they see fit. "Space limitation" was after all only one of the reasons Horton mentioned.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

PM
Posted on Friday, September 15, 2006 - 08:29 am:   

I'd say it's a strange situation when the reviewer has nothing to say. The reviewer could indicate as much. In fact it comes across as being status quo. Reviewers deliberating deciding with anthologies to omit as many author contributions as they deem necessary.

Certainly anyone who is able to do so can write their own review in the manner that they see fit and put it online. But the discussion has been directed toward existing reviewers/publications...
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Lois Tilton
Posted on Friday, September 15, 2006 - 08:37 am:   

One reason I review every story in a magazine [I don't review anthologies] is that I noticed other short fiction reviewers, save for Tangent, generally don't. Also, because IROSF is an e-publication, space is not a consideration. My column for September, due online Any Day Now, is 11,500 words. That's what happens when you review every story. I can't see LOCUS allowing unlimited space that way, so something else would have to be cut.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Lucius
Posted on Friday, September 15, 2006 - 10:27 am:   

I want to apologize to Rich Horton for calling him a frip. It was wholly uncalled for -- I was in, let's say, a ribald mood, and so, as I often do, spoke in an ill-considered fashion. I don't know RH from Adam and so I'm forced to presuppose that he does not have abnormal bathing habits. I shouldn't have made the remarks, because they detracted from the discussion.

Actually, I agree with Horton that one need not/cannot review every story in an anthology, etc. etc. And my comments were not inspired by his omission of my story from his Salon Fantastique review, nor by his brief Locus reviews, but by my general lack of regard for the quality of science fiction reviewing over the last twenty years...indeed, for the lack of quality reviewing in general during that time. The standards of film reviewing during that period have slipped drastically, as the reviewers of major print publications have been co-opted by market forces, corporate interests, and so forth. As an example of the self-serving nature of contemporary reviewing, one only need look at Time Magazine's reviews of the various movies produced under their corporate banner. However, science fiction is not privy to the stresses and pulls that act upon a multi-billion dollar business like the film industry.

The basic conversation as it evolved on Ellen's topic seemed to beg the central issue, which has been alluded to but not clearly stated. That is (in my opinion) as follows. Science fiction criticism/reviewing reminds me, with a handful of notable exceptions, of rock and roll criticism back in the early days of Rolling Stone -- that is to say, almost anyone who wants the job can have it. And when you have that circumstance, you are bound to get a lot of amaturish criticism/reviewing. Uninspired, uninformed by any driving passion, and persuaded of its own importance by circles of sycophants (a phenomenon to which our field is especially prone). Certainly science-fiction/fantasy reviewing has produced, and will continue to produce, its Lester Bangses and Greil Marcuses, et al; yet it also has produced one hell of a lot chaff, and I question the worth and weight of such, and consider the credence given it a matter of politesse.

I take a great deal of criticism for my film reviews, and I am quite willing to stand and defend my point of view. I don't sense the same willingness on the part of many science fiction critics/reviewers. They seem to believe they're above such exchanges. I strongly think that they should welome criticism and should be willing to respond to their critics in other than an injured, impatient manner. I'm a firm believer that it's a critic's job not merely to report on what they find special about what they review, but to make plain the criteria for their judgments. I mean, who are these people who pretend to know things--pretend being the operative word--and how do they arrive at conclusions, which seem to many arbitrary, desultory, and informed by no real aesthetic, other than by the latest wind that has stirred the genre weeds, and, in some instances, by the most narrow of personal agendas?

How I feel about Rich Horton as a reviewer is of no moment in this conversation. I don't believe he is particularly good reader of my work, yet he has made in the past some salient points about it. I am, as he stated, an uneven writer--I write a lot, and some stories just don't work out the way I want them to. That he tends to be dismissive of my Central American stories seems to me short-sighted, to lack the perspective, if not the critical machinery, that would allow him to critique effectively or to read with insight the work of any regionalist; yet I don't take such criticism to heart, nor is his opinion of my stories of any real moment. The question is more general, demanding a more inclusive focus, a wider and more far-ranging discussion.

It's been pointed out to me that I should distinguish between reviewers and critics. Reviewers are generally given less space in which to practice their craft, but the distinction between the two seems in some ways specious. Reviewers do more-or-less the same job as critics and can be no less influential than critics and are often critics-in-the-making. By being perceived as reviewers and not critics, they avoid being held to a certain standard, and yet their reviews, by statement, omission, or whatever means, make choices and state opinions. I suppose, however, that this distinction should be part of the discussion.

It's not a matter of my agreeing with or disagreeing with a certain critic that has been the sponsor of these remarks. Dave Truesdale, for example, is not a reviewer/critic with whom I don't often agree, but one has to respect him for clearly stating his perspective on the field. My thesis is that any critic or reviewer should take the time to clarify his stance toward things fantastical and science fictional when called upon to do so. I'm sure that one response to this will be that some critics/reviewers say, You can get that by reading my reviews. That's insufficient. I only read the reviews that I am sent, and not all of those--and I'm sure most people have neither the time nor inclination to read the body of any critics work. Forums like this one, graciously provided by Nightshade and by Ellen, offer an opportunity for critics/reviewers, fans, and writers to interact and come to reasonable conclusions about one another.

That's all, folks.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Jonathan Strahan
Posted on Friday, September 15, 2006 - 04:17 pm:   

PM:

It seems to me that itís implicit in your question that reviewing every story in an anthology, collection, or issue of a magazine is a desirable thing. While in many cases this may be true, itís also the case that thereís little or nothing useful to be said about a given story, and so itís perfectly reasonable not to mention it.

Iíd also say that Locusís review staff is the best in the field today. I have no desire to tie their hands with unnecessary restrictions. Rather, having agreed what is to be reviewed and the space limitations involved, I prefer to give them as free a hand as possible. That said, on rare occasions Iíve asked for changes, and have even edited some reviews to remove unnecessary coverage of some stories.

In the case of Salon Fantastique, I was pleased with the coverage of the book that the two reviews provided. Between Rich and Nick, I felt that the book was very well handled for the magazine.

As to your specific questions: I have no objection to all of the stories in a book or magazine being reviewed, but Iím not looking for it either. If a reviewer feels that the best approach to the book or magazine is to review every story, and they can do the job well within the magazineís length restrictions, then Iím happy with that for the most part, but itís not necessary.

As to publishing online: Mark Kelly does a great job editing Locus Online and I wouldnít presume to comment on what he does, but Locus magazine isnít looking to publish reviews online at the moment.

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

Jonathan Strahan
Posted on Friday, September 15, 2006 - 04:18 pm:   

Lois: 11,500 words! We try to keep Locus to about 25,000 words of reviews per month. Typically, the two short fiction columns are about 1500 words each. That's a guide though, not set in stone.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Jonathan Strahan
Posted on Friday, September 15, 2006 - 04:25 pm:   

Lucius: I'd agree that reviewing/criticism is part of a dialog about the field. It's entirely reasonable to expect that reviewers/critics should be willing to continue that dialog beyond the printed page. In my experience, the best critics in the field (Gary Wolfe, John Clute, John Kessel and so on) are intelligent, informed and articulate people who can and do conduct such conversations on their views on the field. And I'd also agree that anyone can hang out their shingle and say they're a reviewer or critic (much as seemingly, anyone can be an "expert" on television). It's only over time that you get to see, through their reviews and what they say elsewhere, whether they have the chops to do the job well.

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

Lucius
Posted on Friday, September 15, 2006 - 05:03 pm:   

Jonathan, then we're in accord.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Lois Tilton
Posted on Friday, September 15, 2006 - 05:30 pm:   

One thing about the online review venues - or some of them - is that they do provide a forum for the exchange of views between readers and reviewers.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Richard R. Horton
Posted on Friday, September 15, 2006 - 08:55 pm:   

Thank you for the apology, Mr. Shepard -- accepted.

As for the rest -- to a considerable extent I agree with you. Certainly I feel I can and should improve -- a direction is suggested by a blog thread at the Vector blog, inspired by this thread, I think. Niall Harrison, I think, started it: <url:http://vectoreditors.wordpress.com/2006/09/14/i-want-my-21st-century-william-ath eling-jr/>.

Hope that link works!

As for dialogue about my reviews -- yes, I do welcome it. I admit I have been defensive in the past in at least one case about criticism of one of my essays -- and I regretted my defensive response immediately and apologized. In this case I think any defensiveness I may have shown (not much I think) is a response more to criticism of my bathing habits from someone who hasn't been in the same bath with me rather than criticism of my criticism ...

So, by all means -- everyone -- tell me when you think my reviews are full of it.

Am I a less than ideal reader of Lucius Shepard? Very likely -- there are certainly aspects of his work I am not in sympathy with. Most obviously the tendency towards horror -- as indicated by my response to his story "Limbo" in Ellen's anthology The Dark, which I thought started out wonderfully -- was well on its way to being as good a Shepard story as I've read -- but then turned into a weird horror story not to my taste at all. But I have no doubt Shepard planned the story that way from the getgo, and that its intended audience loved it.

Still, I'll keep reading him, and keep saying what I think ... if I think I have anything interesting to say.

And by the way, I really enjoy Mr. Shepard's movie reviews -- I look forward to them even when I haven't seen, and don't plan to see, the movies. They are very funny, very energetic, yes -- very passionate. I can't help thinking I might like to see a story in that mode, but his fictional imagination doesn't seem to turn that way.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

PM
Posted on Saturday, September 16, 2006 - 07:52 am:   

I'd like to thank Lois for being comprehensive. If it takes 11,500 words to achieve your goal then take 11,500 words.

I think Shepard's Handbook of American Prayer which discusses a certain movie reviewer and others falls into the "I might like see a story in that mode".
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

PM
Posted on Saturday, September 16, 2006 - 08:07 am:   

Listened to the WBAI radio show early this morning.

"Theme" or "no theme", ah the controversy rages :-)

Hopefully Avalon Press will continue to publish genre...

It was a treat listening to Ric Bowes read...and you as well!
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ellen Datlow
Posted on Saturday, September 16, 2006 - 09:54 am:   

Glad we've moved to the less thorny here. :-)

PM, Wow! You were awake for it? I tried to go to sleep early but couldn't sleep at all. Rick and I went to breakfast aftewards and I just got up after napping for a few hours so I don't feel quite like a zombie.

I couldn't go into the Avalon Press thing on radio but I doubt they'll continue with publishing genre as John Oakes was the editor who brought it into the company with Four Walls Eight Windows. My hope is that John gets a comfy job with another publisher and will buy all our work (including Lucius's) there.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

PM
Posted on Saturday, September 16, 2006 - 11:17 am:   

Fortunately I was able to listen live to the WBAI...
and I should thank Jim Freund for his work.

I wish John the best and hope that he'll be able to continue buying the work of authors I enjoy. Not that I'm being selfish or anything...:-)
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Lucius
Posted on Saturday, September 16, 2006 - 11:25 am:   

You think it's less thorny, Ellen. I ever tell you how I feel about.... ;)
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ellen Datlow
Posted on Saturday, September 16, 2006 - 11:51 am:   

PM--
I'm sure Jim would be delighted to hear it.


Me too :-)

Lucius...I'm sure you have :-)--or will.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Richard Bowes
Posted on Saturday, September 16, 2006 - 12:35 pm:   

Ellen - See I told you there was probably someone listening.

PM - Thanks very much, I hope you appreciated my changing the dirty words since the story was broadcast after 6AM ET.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

PM
Posted on Saturday, September 16, 2006 - 02:03 pm:   

Ric, I have mixed feelings about the changing of the dirty words, but if it's ok with you then I'm willing to let it fuckin' pass.

It's well past time though for brand new curse words/phrases and obscenities. I just don't feel shocked or dirty anymore. And folk said that taking Latin out of the public schools was a good thing. I feel totally unprepared to dick around much less fuck around with the English language. Truly I'm pissed :-)
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Christopher Barzak
Posted on Saturday, September 16, 2006 - 02:05 pm:   

Ellen, I listened to the archived recording after I woke up. You guys did a good interview and reading. I'm really excited to see the book. The revised cover on your website is really great. I hope John Oakes finds a new publisher to work with soon and can continue to buy great work from genre authors and editors.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ellen Datlow
Posted on Saturday, September 16, 2006 - 06:07 pm:   

Wow, Chris! It was archived that quickly? Glad you enjoyed it.

Yeah, me too!
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ellen Datlow
Posted on Sunday, September 17, 2006 - 08:53 am:   

Btw, the interview/reading is archived for twelve days at the WBAI website in its archives but you can access it easier from Rick's site (events)
http://www.rickbowes.com/

I listened to it (I usually HATE listening to myself) and it wasn't bad :-)
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Jennifer Ruth Corry
Posted on Wednesday, September 20, 2006 - 12:49 am:   

As an avid reader and an aspiring writer, after reading all the comments here (especially the fiery ones) by professional authors and reviewers whose company I didn't think I'd be in (even online) for at least several more years, all I can say is..wow. I've read various stories by various authors, but this is the first time I've ever read casual dialogue from the professionals themselves, and it was quite an interesting experience. In the company of those of you who are editors, authors and critics, I feel like quite the greenhorn here, but to hear the debates and occasional insults included in these posts..well, that really brings it home. I guess you could say I almost feel like a person who, after years of seeing celebrities only onscreen in their shining prime, one night quite suddenly comes upon them all gathered casually in a bar, pleasantly griping about their careers and life in general. If I'm to be a writer, I guess all this is what I have to look forward to (I think I've definetly decided against being a reviewer, though :-) Ellen, I noticed you kept a cool position even when the debates got rather heated; there's something I could learn from. You were right about the book; it's been a while since my last post, but I checked the board again last night and saw your comment that "Salon" should be available any minute. I checked a few online bookstores and, sure enough, found that they were already selling it (I hadn't expected this till late September). My own copy is now on the way; Yippee! Thanks for the heads-up
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Richard Bowes
Posted on Wednesday, September 20, 2006 - 07:20 am:   

Jennifer: This is nothing, you should see what goes on in the restricted SFWA groups.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ellen Datlow
Posted on Wednesday, September 20, 2006 - 07:32 am:   

Hi Jennifer,
Well, I (unlike some people) realize this is part of my professional face and I think it's important to at least try to be civil online :-). I've occasionally lost my temper and "said" things I've regretted but not too often...

And as Rick said...not only in the SFWA groups but on the HWA BB.

I hope you enjoy the book when you get it.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ellen Datlow
Posted on Tuesday, September 26, 2006 - 07:40 am:   

FANTASTIC FICTION at KGB reading series, hosts Ellen Datlow and Helen Pilinovsky

present:



A special event launching Salon Fantastique edited by Ellen Datlow & Terri Windling



Jeffrey Ford, author of the Edgar Allan Poe award-winning novel The Girl in the Glass and a three Ėtime winner of the World Fantasy Award



Rick Bowes, winner of the Lambda Award and the World Fantasy Award and author most recently of Streetcar Dreams and Other Midnight Fancies),



Delia Sherman, author of The Porcelain Dove, winner of the Mythopoeic Fantasy Award and of Changelingójust out



Paul Di Filippo, author of twenty-one books, including the new collection Shuteye For the Timebroker



Catherynne Valente, author of The Orphan's Tales series and two books of poetry



Jedediah Berry, author of the forthcoming novel The Manual of Detection



And Greer Gilman, author of the Crawford award-winning novel Moonwise and the World Fantasy Award winning novella A Crowd of Bone.



will read from the anthology and sign books*







* Salon Fantastique will be available for purchase



Wednesday October 18th at 7pm at

KGB Bar, 85 East 4th Street (just off 2nd Ave, upstairs.)

http://www.kgbbar.com

Subscribe to our mailing list:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/kgbfantasticfiction/join
Readings are free
Forward to friends at your own discretion.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

PM
Posted on Wednesday, October 04, 2006 - 01:35 pm:   

I was over at the Thunders Mouth website and couldn't find nada on Salon Fantastique!
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ellen Datlow
Posted on Wednesday, October 04, 2006 - 05:28 pm:   

Good question. I've just emailed our titular editor.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ellen Datlow
Posted on Thursday, October 05, 2006 - 07:21 am:   

I've been told that the October titles haven't been uploaded yet. So keep watching the site.....
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ellen Datlow
Posted on Tuesday, October 10, 2006 - 08:33 am:   

Terri Windling writes about "literary salons" and the idea behind Salon Fantastique on the Endicott Studio blog:
http://endicottstudio.typepad.com/endicott_redux/
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

PM
Posted on Friday, October 13, 2006 - 03:52 pm:   

"I've been told that the October titles haven't been uploaded yet. So keep watching the site....."

I see they've put up the Nov/Dec titles.

And still no Salon...

Well, they could teach Tor a thing or two about updating a website :-)
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ellen Datlow
Posted on Sunday, October 15, 2006 - 06:34 pm:   

Thanks. Contacted my contact person again, although I must say I don't have a heck of a lot of hope that anything will be done.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ellen Datlow
Posted on Wednesday, October 25, 2006 - 10:27 am:   

An excerpt from Paul Witcover's review in SCI FI Weekly:

"...Salon Fantastique more closely resembles an exceptionally strong issue of a magazine.

Or maybe a saloon. Why not? A good saloon mixes intoxication and storytelling, and that is exactly what readers will find in these pagesóminus the hangover. But call it what you will, salon or saloon, Datlow and Windling's freeform anthology is one of the year's best showcases of fantastic fiction.

A testament to the field's vitality

Anthologies often contain one or two stories manifestly superior to the rest, but that is not the case here. Most of the fiction in Salon Fantastique is of a very high caliber, encompassing a wide variety of settings, from the historical to the contemporary to the otherworldly, and of styles...."

The whole rave can be read here:
http://www.scifi.com/sfw/books/sfw13882.html
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

PM
Posted on Saturday, October 28, 2006 - 04:41 pm:   

I was happy to see two copies of Salon at Borders. It's the only Datlow book I've seen in our chain stores.

While at Borders I saw the Sony eReader. It's slick and way overpriced but I bought one anyway. I'd recommend that folk just put their hands on one...

Anyway Sony has their own bookstore and so I did the natural search for Datlow thing. Only one book, YBFH #16 with this bio:

"Ellen Datlow is the acclaimed editor of such anthologies as Sirens and Other Daemon Lovers (with Terri Windling), Blood Is Not Enough, Lethal Kisses, and Off Limits, and has won the World Fantasy Award five times. She lives in New York City and currently edits fiction for Scifi.com."

Guess they took that from #16...
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ellen Datlow
Posted on Saturday, October 28, 2006 - 05:56 pm:   

Thanks for the report, PM--where do you live?

I wonder why they have only one book and why it's that particular one? Weird. boy is that bio dated.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ellen Datlow
Posted on Sunday, October 29, 2006 - 11:12 am:   

Wolfe is published by Tor, though. Not St Martin's (although they're both owned by Holzbrinck.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ellen Datlow
Posted on Sunday, November 19, 2006 - 07:32 pm:   

More good reviews:
http://www.greenmanreview.com/book/book_datlow_windling_salon.html

and

http://www.readingtheleaves.com/?q=cestfantastique
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

PM
Posted on Sunday, November 19, 2006 - 07:50 pm:   

"Wolfe is published by Tor, though. Not St Martin's (although they're both owned by Holzbrinck.)"

Sorry for any confusion I may have created.

For some reason I recall seeing St. Martin's being listed in conjunction with Wolfe. Or I should say both Tor and St. Martin's.

Obviously Wolfe has had quite a few books over the years released by Tor.

And for some bizarre reason I've thought for a number of years that Tor was under St. Martin's.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ellen Datlow
Posted on Monday, December 18, 2006 - 03:39 pm:   

January Magazine has chosen SF for their fiction holiday gift guide! Thank you January Magazine. And thank you Mr. Ford for pointing it my way ;-)


http://januarymagazine.com/2006/12/gift-guide-part-one-fiction.html
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ellen Datlow
Posted on Monday, December 18, 2006 - 05:42 pm:   

And as ahem, Delia Sherman pointed out, according to the review, Lucius is "Lucious." Congrats, L. that's your new wrestling handle.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

PM
Posted on Monday, December 18, 2006 - 06:44 pm:   

Amazon has a few books by Lucious Shepard.

It's catching on...
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

S. Hamm
Posted on Tuesday, December 19, 2006 - 01:46 pm:   

I believe "Lucious" is the adjectival form.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

PM
Posted on Tuesday, December 19, 2006 - 01:55 pm:   

I understand that his verb can strike fear...

It's great to see SF gaining additional exposure.

The message for the holidays is "Buy more SF!"
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ellen Datlow
Posted on Tuesday, December 19, 2006 - 02:19 pm:   

I'm delighted that SF is getting more exposure,especially as I didn't see it in my local B&N this afternoon :-(

Niall Harrison has started reviewing a "story a day"--we'll see if he gets through it:

http://tinyurl.com/y3gm3n
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

PM
Posted on Tuesday, December 19, 2006 - 02:48 pm:   

"especially as I didn't see it in my local B&N this afternoon :-("

Surely they'd be willing to put it in the local/regional authors section LOL :-)
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ellen Datlow
Posted on Tuesday, December 19, 2006 - 02:50 pm:   

It's possible they had it, it sold out, and they didn't reorder. They did have a bunch of other books edited by me that I signed.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

PM
Posted on Tuesday, December 19, 2006 - 02:57 pm:   

The selling out sounds a lot better but they need to restock.

Surely they'd restock on their own though...perhaps they need a nudge/shove from customers.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ellen Datlow
Posted on Tuesday, December 19, 2006 - 03:22 pm:   

Well, a customer could always request it, but it looks bad when the author asks them to restock ;-)
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

PM
Posted on Tuesday, December 19, 2006 - 03:56 pm:   

Especially if you've been there signing books.

Help me to understand though. Were you there doing a book signing and they didn't have any SF?

Did you then think it in bad form to ask where did the SF go?
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ellen Datlow
Posted on Tuesday, December 19, 2006 - 04:16 pm:   

PM, I was in the neighborhood, stopped in to see which of my books they had, and offered to sign them.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

PM
Posted on Tuesday, December 19, 2006 - 04:39 pm:   

Neat!

Maybe someone will read your posts here and will go and make that SF request...
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ellen Datlow
Posted on Wednesday, December 20, 2006 - 08:14 am:   

The second review by Niall Harrison:
http://tinyurl.com/y5xytw
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ellen Datlow
Posted on Thursday, December 21, 2006 - 07:34 pm:   

Femaville 29:
http://tinyurl.com/y52l43
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ellen Datlow
Posted on Friday, December 22, 2006 - 09:15 am:   

Concealment Shoes:

http://tinyurl.com/vjpk5
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ellen Datlow
Posted on Saturday, December 23, 2006 - 10:34 am:   

Harrison says: "Itís a sneaky trick, this book: an unthemed anthology prettied up to look like a themed one."

I'm kind of perplexed, as the book is clearly a non-theme anthology, it was always MEANT to be a non-theme antho, and the book cover and the intro clearly state that it's a non-theme antho.

My Travels with Al-Qaeda
http://tinyurl.com/yz559u
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ellen Datlow
Posted on Saturday, December 23, 2006 - 12:03 pm:   

arghhh. Niall explains that the "that the Salon concept itself was imposing"--which is the problem with finding interesting, catchy titles.
Readers are going to interpret them from their experiences, rather than authorial/editorial intent. I'd hoped/counted on the subtitle: Fifteen original Tales of Fantasy --doing the trick.

So now I worry that INFERNO will be criticized for not featuring stories about hell and having no relation to Dante.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Lucius
Posted on Saturday, December 23, 2006 - 12:09 pm:   

I can write one for you in two weeks... ;)
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ellen Datlow
Posted on Saturday, December 23, 2006 - 12:16 pm:   

LOL. I know you can but the book is already sooo full as you well know :-)
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Niall Harrison
Posted on Saturday, December 23, 2006 - 02:33 pm:   

To be clear, I wasn't criticising SF for being unthemed -- quite the opposite. It just caught me by surprise, a bit, but it's at least possible that this is just me being slow on the uptake. You might want to get a few more datapoints before worrying. :-)

(For what it's worth "Inferno" reads to me as much more generic than "Salon Fantastique"...)
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Niall Harrison
Posted on Saturday, December 23, 2006 - 03:15 pm:   

"neutral" would probably be a better word than "generic", there.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ellen Datlow
Posted on Saturday, December 23, 2006 - 04:08 pm:   

Really? That's weird. I would think INFERNO seems more specific than SF...hmmmm.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

PM
Posted on Saturday, December 23, 2006 - 07:59 pm:   

Agreed about the intro. It spells it out. Seems to me that we're going to need numerous more unthemed anthologies to make it acceptable.

I prefer the name SF to Inferno because it's more exotic.

If Inferno has nothing to do with heat, fire, or burning then people are naturally going to wonder.

Do you still have an antho that needs a name?

Hopefully Lucius will get to express his inner Dante!
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ellen Datlow
Posted on Saturday, December 23, 2006 - 09:31 pm:   

PM. YES!!!! My Del Rey non-theme sf/f/h antho needs a name. I've suggested several to my editor but haven't gotten a response....HELP!!!!
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

PM
Posted on Sunday, December 24, 2006 - 02:39 am:   

Long day. Just a couple to help the brainstorming process.

AMALGAMATIONS An unthemed sf/f/h collection

THE DISPARATE DREAM An unthemed...

... An unthemed sf/f/h collection

... As a title will display an edge :-)

DISPARATE STREAMS

SEDIMENTARIAN EXHUMATIONS
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Michael Kelly
Posted on Sunday, December 24, 2006 - 07:57 am:   

I'm not good with titles, but how about "Strange Currents?" Rather sedate, I imagine.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ellen Datlow
Posted on Sunday, December 24, 2006 - 08:34 am:   

The Guardian of the Egg
http://tinyurl.com/yhcy8t
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ellen Datlow
Posted on Sunday, December 24, 2006 - 08:37 am:   

Here are some of those I came up with:
Cabinet of Wonders
Curiosities and Wonders
The Celestial Emporium
The Celestial Bazaar
Emporium of Wonders
Junctions
Marvels and Curiousities
Strange Attractors and other oddities
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Jeffrey Ford
Posted on Sunday, December 24, 2006 - 09:03 am:   

Automat of Stories
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ellen Datlow
Posted on Sunday, December 24, 2006 - 09:44 am:   

Thanks Jeff ;-) Get your hot stories HERE!
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Christopher Barzak
Posted on Sunday, December 24, 2006 - 09:46 am:   

I can't tell if you were joking or not, Jeff, but I think that would actually make an awesome concept, with a great cover that I'd buy. The Celestial Automat.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Bruce Chrumka
Posted on Sunday, December 24, 2006 - 09:47 am:   

Reliable Sources
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ellen Datlow
Posted on Sunday, December 24, 2006 - 09:47 am:   

But hardly anyone knows what an automat is any more...
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Jeffrey Ford
Posted on Sunday, December 24, 2006 - 10:01 am:   

You have a picture on the cover of an automat and in each of the little windows you have some weird little thing from each of the stories or some of the stories or whatever. I like Chris's "Celestial" much better. Have an old man or woman or both, or better yet an old alien in a rumpled overcoat and hat, standing in front of it and you see over their shoulders into the glass cages.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Lucius
Posted on Sunday, December 24, 2006 - 10:14 am:   

I wonder if many people will recognize it, the image not withstanding. But I like the old alien. He could be holding a sign.

Will Work For Grxxpflk

Gahan Wilson could do it...
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ellen Datlow
Posted on Sunday, December 24, 2006 - 11:20 am:   

Not a bad idea (well some of the above ;-) )
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

PM
Posted on Sunday, December 24, 2006 - 04:43 pm:   

Strange Attractors and other oddities has some appeal.

Do Automat and Will Work For Grxxpflk fit? Some suggestions are good but would perhaps work better with a different collection.

Sizing for titles.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ellen Datlow
Posted on Sunday, December 24, 2006 - 09:37 pm:   

Will Work for G doesn't fit at all. Celestial Automat is intriguing.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

PM
Posted on Monday, December 25, 2006 - 09:31 am:   

Regadless of whether it's used Will Work is funny.

How is horror represented?
Does it take one or more slots/windows in the automat?

Celestial Automat --- Yah!
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ellen Datlow
Posted on Monday, December 25, 2006 - 10:15 am:   

Margo Lanagan's story is definitely horror and so is Laird Barron's--kind of.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

PM
Posted on Monday, December 25, 2006 - 12:21 pm:   

The Will Work idea was funny.

I like Celestial Automat more and more.

I wouldn't mind seeing a dead elf in one of the compartments :-). That may not work.

Just don't.forget the horror. Celestial Automat as a title can evoke f and/or sf. But I need something visually to associate Celestial Automat with horror.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ellen Datlow
Posted on Monday, December 25, 2006 - 09:05 pm:   

Celestial Automat of the Damned?
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

PM
Posted on Monday, December 25, 2006 - 10:12 pm:   

Yah!
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Jess Patrick
Posted on Tuesday, December 26, 2006 - 10:14 am:   

They the Unglad Moon

Ten Hug the Moon Lady

Me the Unholy Ant God

Doth Out Angel Hymen


are a few anagrams of "Unthemed Anthology".

Gotta be something in that phrase that works.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ellen Datlow
Posted on Tuesday, December 26, 2006 - 11:04 am:   

Somehow, I can't see my publisher embracing any of those, Jess :-)
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Jeffrey Ford
Posted on Tuesday, December 26, 2006 - 11:24 am:   

No, but my next story is going to be "The Ten Hymans of the Unholy Ant God."
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Jeffrey Ford
Posted on Tuesday, December 26, 2006 - 11:27 am:   

That's Paul Hymans -- Belgian Statesman.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ellen Datlow
Posted on Tuesday, December 26, 2006 - 12:25 pm:   

Yours, Etc.
http://tinyurl.com/wvzh2
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ellen Datlow
Posted on Wednesday, December 27, 2006 - 06:50 pm:   

A Gray and Soundless Tide
http://tinyurl.com/y8b2ht
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ellen Datlow
Posted on Thursday, December 28, 2006 - 06:28 pm:   

Dust Devil on a Quiet Street
http://tinyurl.com/y9w32l
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ellen Datlow
Posted on Friday, December 29, 2006 - 04:15 pm:   

Down the Wall
http://tinyurl.com/yzrhod
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ellen Datlow
Posted on Saturday, December 30, 2006 - 10:03 am:   

La Fee Verte
http://tinyurl.com/ycorhj
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ellen Datlow
Posted on Monday, January 01, 2007 - 07:57 pm:   

Jeff VanderMeer conducted an interview with me for his new column on SF Site:
It's mostly about Salon Fantastique:
http://tinyurl.com/yxuvwm
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

PM
Posted on Monday, January 01, 2007 - 08:10 pm:   

That's an early photo!
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ellen Datlow
Posted on Monday, January 01, 2007 - 08:47 pm:   

Yup, it is.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

PM
Posted on Monday, January 01, 2007 - 09:19 pm:   

Thanks Terri for the title.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ellen Datlow
Posted on Tuesday, January 16, 2007 - 11:02 am:   

I've just discovered that Kelly & Gavin (hence the fantasy half of YBFH#20) have taken three stories from SF:
The Night Whiskey by Jeffrey Ford
Femaville 29 by Paul Di Filippo
La Fee Verte by Delia Sherman

Congratulations to the three authors!
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ellen Datlow
Posted on Thursday, January 18, 2007 - 08:14 am:   

Yesterday I discovered that the titular editor of SF (John Oakes's assistant at Thunder's Mouth), Lukas, is also gone from the company. I found out by receiving an automatic email reply which is not a happy way to discover such a thing. We're basically screwed by the whole PGW debacle, I suspect. I've asked my agent to please find out who is now in charge of our book. Arghhh!
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

PM
Posted on Thursday, January 18, 2007 - 03:19 pm:   

Congrads on the stories being chosen!

Hope you discover something one way or the other about SF's status soon.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ellen Datlow
Posted on Thursday, January 18, 2007 - 04:14 pm:   

Thanks.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ellen Datlow
Posted on Saturday, February 03, 2007 - 01:50 pm:   

Salon Fantastique made the Locus recommended reading list as did the following stories from it:
Chandail by Peter S. Beagle
Femaville 29 by Paul Di Filippo
The Night Whiskey by Jeffrey Ford
Concealment Shoes by Marly Youmans
To Measure the Earth by Jedediah Berry
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

PM
Posted on Monday, February 05, 2007 - 03:47 am:   

Read on another thread that you're still searching for a name. Celestial Automat was a winner. Just don't understand...
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ellen Datlow
Posted on Monday, February 05, 2007 - 08:52 am:   

It hasn't been shot down....I think they're waiting for me to turn in the book first...
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

PM
Posted on Monday, February 05, 2007 - 05:53 pm:   

Everyone loves a holdout :-)

Thought of some really bad titles such as:

Nevermind the title, here's your [expletive deleted] anthology!

Again, Dangerous Ellison Knockoffs

The DaVinci Codec

and then some of a sexually suggestive nature such as:

Bra Stretching Stories

The Inevitable Threesome (Tales of sf/f/h)

Hopefully someone will do something with Lucius' Porn for Robots...

And then some other out there sortof ideas:

Pings

The Interlocutory Triad

Rescued from the Data Disaster [the concept being that these stories were recovered from a computer crash]

Mute[ation]s

Fuligan Tales
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ellen Datlow
Posted on Monday, February 05, 2007 - 06:50 pm:   

Somehow, I just can't see my publisher jumping up and down at any of those ;-) maybe swatting me--or you, if I sic em on you!
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

PM
Posted on Monday, February 05, 2007 - 07:35 pm:   

The suggestions may have only been good for a laugh or a cringe. But who knows if your editor would realize that the title suggestions were rapidly degrading and would respond even more favorably to prior suggestions.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

PM
Posted on Tuesday, February 20, 2007 - 02:00 pm:   

In the March F&SF, Elizabeth Hand reviews SF.

The review is toward the bottom at:

http://www.sfsite.com/fsf/2007/eh0703.htm
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

PM
Posted on Tuesday, February 20, 2007 - 02:01 pm:   

"Somehow, I just can't see my publisher jumping up and down at any of those ;-) maybe swatting me--or you, if I sic em on you!"

Well I'll be a monkey's something or other :-)
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ellen Datlow
Posted on Tuesday, February 20, 2007 - 03:49 pm:   

PM,
I'm confused. What are you referring to? Something in Liz's review?
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

PM
Posted on Tuesday, February 20, 2007 - 04:00 pm:   

Sorry for the confusion. Just joking around about what your publisher might call my title suggestions.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ellen Datlow
Posted on Wednesday, February 21, 2007 - 03:26 am:   

Right. But those were for the Del Rey antho, not SF, which was published by Thunder's Mouth :-)--hence my confusion.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

PM
Posted on Wednesday, February 21, 2007 - 09:16 am:   

My bad.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

PM
Posted on Tuesday, February 27, 2007 - 06:10 pm:   

Paul F. Cockburn reviews SF in Interzone #208.

"What Salon Fantastique does not have - at least at first glance - is a clearly defined subject, theme or argument against which its stories can be regarded."

Apparently he's tripped up on expectations that the title did not meet. The stories do not meet his expectation of the salon. Evidently he's ignoring the back cover and the introduction.

The stories are described as:

Sherman's - "delightfully realized"
Tidhar's - "ultimately unsatisfactory"
Youmans' - "somewhat saccharine"
Gilman's - "frankly ostentatious fricassee of entirely forgettable literary pretension"

"The publishers insist that Salon Fantastique straddles "the borderline between 'fantasy' and 'mainstream' fiction"

Shouldn't that be editors instead of publishers?

The sentence continues "meaning that if all these stories should share one thing it is that they are grounded in "realistic" earthly environments into which the authors have dropped singular fantastical elements".

Finally he objects (is increasingly irritated) that none of the protagonists "question or find these fantastical elements at all unusual or unexpected." He considers it a shame that the marvels in the stories robbed of "any genuine sense of wonder".
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ellen Datlow
Posted on Wednesday, February 28, 2007 - 06:10 pm:   

I saw the review. And this quote:

"question or find these fantastical elements at all unusual or unexpected."

...is virtually the same complaint that the PW reviewer had. I find it perplexing. Since when does the fantasy in a story have to be questioned by those who live in that story?
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

PM
Posted on Wednesday, February 28, 2007 - 08:12 pm:   

Seems to me that it's just a wish. The reviewer is asking the writer(s) to take this into account. Writers will have to decide if this is desirable.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

PM
Posted on Thursday, March 01, 2007 - 07:54 am:   

Speaking of wonder and PW, I wonder why the title is thirty instead of fifteen tales...

http://reviews.publishersweekly.com/bd.aspx?isbn=1560258330&pub=pw

Have you got another fifteen tucked away somewhere that you're not talking about :-)
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ellen Datlow
Posted on Thursday, March 01, 2007 - 08:27 am:   

Because they took the info from the publisher before the book was handed in and it was wrong.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Christopher Barzak
Posted on Thursday, March 01, 2007 - 09:31 am:   

I've often wondered about why some people think the people who live in a fantasy story must feel a sense of wonder at the fantastic. Why must it be wonder? Why can't they feel fear about it, like the suburbanites feel towards it in my story? Why can't they feel a sort of religiousity towards it, as they do in Jeff Ford's story? Other emotional responses to the fantastic--which is really only another word for otherness--are just as fair as "sense of wonder". I take this to be readers brought up on the traditional genre story, be it fantasy or scifi, who get a rush off of the sense of wonder and nothing else, the way some people get a rush off of being born again. It's a sort of readerly drug for some readers. Anything else will never be what they want. Perhaps when your scope of how fantasy (or anything else for that matter) should be handled is limited to one category like "sense of wonder", you should hang up the critic's hat.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

PM
Posted on Thursday, March 01, 2007 - 09:44 am:   

CB, I agree that "fantasy" and "sense of wonder" are often equated. It's corollary would be the expectation of superlative special effects in a science fiction movie.

But at the end of the day we all have our expectations. At least the critics are espousing them rather than panning in absentia.


Fantasy #5 reviews SF:

"Salon Fantastique is a commendable compilation of literate fantasy, but enjoy its components discretely."
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ellen Datlow
Posted on Thursday, March 01, 2007 - 10:12 am:   

I'd rather they panned them in absentia, frankly.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ellen Datlow
Posted on Thursday, March 01, 2007 - 10:13 am:   

The reviewer in Fantasy meant for readers to take their time reading the book, and not read everything all at once, because several of the stories are rather dense in texture.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Christopher Barzak
Posted on Thursday, March 01, 2007 - 10:35 am:   

I think critics should espouse their expectations, Pam, but I think critics who have such a narrow set of standards as to expect all good fantasy to affect a sense of wonder aren't really qualified to be critics. A critic has to be able to look at a piece of fiction (or any sort of art they're saying they're qualified to judge) and judge it based on what that narrative is attempting to do, not on what it isn't attempting to do. By judging one genre (or subgenre) of fiction by another genre's (or subgenre's) standards, they've missed the point of criticism entirely. It would be like a food critic complaining that the apple pie didn't taste enough like a chocolate souffle, which they like entirely better when it comes to dessert. It undermines not only the piece in question, but the critic's own critical acumen.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

PM
Posted on Thursday, March 01, 2007 - 10:44 am:   

I agree about the lack of critical acumen and perhaps this is what Ellen means when she doesn't care if reasons/expectations are given. It has to be tedious to deal with false expectations for what the antho ought to be.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ellen Datlow
Posted on Thursday, March 01, 2007 - 01:59 pm:   

Pam,
I actually misunderstood what you meant and see that Christopher responded in the way I would have if I realized that's what you were saying :-)

What I thought you meant is that it's better that a critic pans a book in print rather than bad mouthing
it privately. In THAT I'd prefer the latter to the former you see.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

PM
Posted on Thursday, March 01, 2007 - 02:41 pm:   

Ellen, now I may be confused.

Surely we all agree that critics should be honest and pan a book if that's their honest opinion. And do so in print.

If a book is panned then one wants it be for good reason. For example, panning SF because it isn't comprised of French folk in salons isn't a good reason. (hypothetical example)

Surely though if a critic had legitimate negative comments then it would be appropriate for them to be in print. Right?

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

Christopher Barzak
Posted on Thursday, March 01, 2007 - 05:39 pm:   

No, I think you both are actually on the same page but using different terms of expression.
;-)
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ellen Datlow
Posted on Thursday, March 01, 2007 - 06:48 pm:   

If you're saying would I rather have a book I've edited panned in print or not. I'd have to say I'd rather it not be.;-)
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ellen Datlow
Posted on Friday, June 08, 2007 - 05:15 pm:   

A great "partial review" from someone who really loves the book
http://www.chasingray.com/
scroll down. I hope she finishes raving about the rest of the stories :-)
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ellen Datlow
Posted on Monday, July 09, 2007 - 01:54 pm:   

A rave from Bookslut--this is the total review by the person whose blog is Chasing Ray
She totally gets the book. Hooray!
http://www.bookslut.com/fiction/2007_06_011339.php
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ellen Datlow
Posted on Sunday, September 16, 2007 - 02:40 pm:   

I can't remember if I mentioned that happily Salon Fantastique has made the World Fantasy Award Ballot for Best Anthology.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

PM
Posted on Sunday, September 16, 2007 - 04:02 pm:   

I don't think that you had mentioned it before.

Yah! for you and all your contributors!
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ellen Datlow
Posted on Sunday, September 16, 2007 - 04:16 pm:   

Yeah. I couldn't find it mentioned anyplace around here...
Thanks. I'm a little dispppointed that Jeff's "The Night Whiskey" wasn't nominated.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

PM
Posted on Sunday, September 16, 2007 - 04:31 pm:   

It's difficult to keep up with the sheer number of awards. "The Night Whiskey" was nominated elsewhere if I recall correctly.

There seems to be a pattern most likely due to different groups of voters which results in a nomination here but not there.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ellen Datlow
Posted on Sunday, September 16, 2007 - 04:52 pm:   

I think "The Night Whiskey" was nominated for the Locus award.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

PM
Posted on Sunday, September 16, 2007 - 05:03 pm:   

I know it's not the Ultraman statue but I like Locus. I tend to think of their readership as being a bit more broad minded as it's neither weighted toward science fiction nor fantasy.

The Hugos are heavily weighted toward Asimovs just as the Nebulas are weighted toward F&SF.

It's interesting to speculate how "The Night Whiskey" would have fared if it had appeared in Asimovs. Though an appearance there would have been unlikely.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ellen Datlow
Posted on Thursday, September 20, 2007 - 04:28 pm:   

PM,
What do you mean by "weighted"? That implies there is some system that impinges on the voting system. What I believe you mean to say is that in this past year (stories published in 2006 and voted for in 2007) F&SF stories dominated the Nebulas and Asimov stories dominated the Hugos.

You're forgtetting that this year's Hugos were a one-off. Most usual voters didn't vote because they weren't planning on attending a convention in Japan. If you'll check the history you'll see that Asimov's had only four nominees on the 2006 ballot.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

PM
Posted on Thursday, September 20, 2007 - 06:43 pm:   

I suppose I could use "favored" instead of "weighted". It appears to my eyes that the Nebs favor F&SF while the Hugos do not. If I recall correctly that seems to be the way the winners have been going in recent years.

If the Nebs voter is reading F&SF to the exclusion of other publications, or is predisposed to it then in my view there is a "weighting" toward F&SF.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ellen Datlow
Posted on Thursday, September 20, 2007 - 06:52 pm:   

But as I said above, you're wrong. I've just checked Hugo winners since 2000. In fact, Asimov's had a few winners, F&SF had a few, and several anthologies and collections plus Analog had more winners than either Asimov's or F&SF.

Plus the Nebulas since 2000 have also been all over the place. It's true that Asimov's is underrepresented, but F&SF has not won most of them. Plenty were won by SCIFICTION or were from collections.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

PM
Posted on Thursday, September 20, 2007 - 09:11 pm:   

For the last two years, F&SF has dominated the short story category. Asimov's has been a no-show in this category.

I believe that in 2004, it's the complete opposite. All Asimov's and no F&SF.

But I should have clarified this as saying this was a comparison between Asimov's and F&SF. And so if there were only Asimov's and F&SF (and they published collections and novels) I think of Bowes, Ford, Gaiman, and Link's work to be more likely to have appeared in F&SF.

There are then the literal wins where the work actually appears in F&SF and then the non-literal ones where I associate that author's work more with F&SF than Asimov's. And of course this theory works better in some years than others.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ellen Datlow
Posted on Thursday, September 20, 2007 - 09:14 pm:   

PM--That makes no sense.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

PM
Posted on Thursday, September 20, 2007 - 09:37 pm:   

Obviously authors appear in more than one publication. But do you associate some authors with one publication more than others?

Here's an example. M. Rickert. I associate her more with F&SF than any other publication. Her work obviously has been collected in a book and nominated for awards. It wasn't published by F&SF but when I think of Map of Dreams I think of F&SF.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ellen Datlow
Posted on Friday, September 21, 2007 - 07:38 am:   

I understand that, but when theorizing about awards it doesn't wash ;-) Besides, I probably published more of Jeff Ford's stories in various venues than anyone else.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ellen Datlow
Posted on Friday, September 21, 2007 - 08:05 am:   

To only count Asimov's and F&SF makes no sense. SCIFICTION was a major player from 2000-2005 and Analog has always had nominees in the mix.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

PM
Posted on Friday, September 21, 2007 - 08:07 am:   

Agreed. So when I think of Bowes and Ford (who I link together) I should be thinking Datlow and Scifiction.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ellen Datlow
Posted on Friday, September 21, 2007 - 08:27 am:   

I just realized that I probably have published more of Rick Bowes' stories than Gordon by now, too.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Gordon Van Gelder
Posted on Saturday, September 22, 2007 - 06:01 am:   

I didn't realize it was a competition.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

PM
Posted on Saturday, September 22, 2007 - 07:15 am:   

One wonders what the prize might be. Perhaps it's a heart warming feeling that one was able to purchase a story or the work of an author.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ellen Datlow
Posted on Saturday, September 22, 2007 - 11:07 am:   

It isn't. That's partly why I think PM's "theory" is a non-starter.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

PM
Posted on Saturday, September 22, 2007 - 11:22 am:   

One doesn't have to consider it in terms of competition though.

I was thinking of it in terms of association. Who do I associate the winners with more: Asimov's or F&SF? And if those were the only two publications in existence going back over the last few years where would I associate that author's work more. Or who would be most likely to publish it.

An intellectual exercise of sorts...just as I would associate Salon more with F&SF than Asimov's.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Richard Bowes
Posted on Saturday, September 29, 2007 - 01:45 pm:   

I'm getting to this very late, but I think a competition between Ellen and Gordon to see who could publish more of my stories would be excellent and wonderful way to arouse interest in the short fiction market. (Just think of the office betting pools!). For the record: Ellen has currently bought more of my stories than Gordon has. But F&SF has bought more than Ellen has.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ellen Datlow
Posted on Saturday, September 29, 2007 - 04:29 pm:   

We'll have to see about that !
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

PM
Posted on Saturday, September 29, 2007 - 04:59 pm:   

Well, Rick at the risk of being accused of being a fence sitter (being both for competition and a non-competitive approach) let me second your suggestion that Ellen and F&SF should wage that fierce battle.

But there should be more awards because there aren't enough already.

Undoubtedly, more would be interested in an award that rewarded the person who had the most genre stories published. And if that got out of hand then maybe it could be awarded every six months.

A few might object to an award based on the number of stories and might insist on word count as a better metric. Even the Americans might go along with that one. So perhaps this would be a second award you know one to promote novellas...

And then perhaps even fewer would be interested in the less is more approach. As in an award that pits Ellison against King in the least likely to get a short story published award :-) (No disrespect intended)
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ellen Datlow
Posted on Saturday, September 29, 2007 - 09:35 pm:   

Tom Disch believes that at awards ceremonies everyone should go home with an award.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Richard Bowes
Posted on Saturday, September 29, 2007 - 09:54 pm:   

Right, otherwise why call it an awards ceremony? The last one I attended everyone should have gotten an award just for sitting through it.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

PM
Posted on Sunday, September 30, 2007 - 12:54 am:   

An attendance award...

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

| Moderators | Administrators |