Yesterday I dropped in and noticed the "Get published in Issue 7" thingy, and said "woa, deadline's tomorrow, I guess I missed my chance for that one." But as I continued to cruise the forum the cover picture stuck in my mind, and darned if I didn't come up with a story idea that went along with it. So I said, "what the hey, get offline and start writing, what have you got to lose?" Today I finished the story "Shell Game", cruised on back over here to check the submission guidelines, and... ... they want 1500 words, I've got 4800. Oops! I guess I'll just have to start sending it out to people who pay better than contributor's copies. :)

If you get published, more power to you. But for those who did enter, I assure you that there's a great benefit to being published even if the monetary award isn't there....you sometimes get noticed in ways you didn't expect. And for some of us who never thought we'd see a word of ours in print, it is a stunning moment to see it happen when we least expected it. So good luck to you. And good luck to those who entered as well. It's all good, as they used to say in a time after mine.

I know what you mean. My first cut at it came out at 3800+ words. I've managed to pare it down quite a bit, so I think it will qualify. But 1500 words does not give one much room for description or development. Space in a magazine is a premium, so I can see the reason for it. I hope they can afford just a we bit more space next time around. jon

I feel better. I had a slim 3,000 or so, but after judicious cutting, it's down to the required length,though the whole opus reads like a telegram..stop...;)

It's a good exercise to learn to edit. Many stories suffer from an excess of unnecessary adjectives, adverbs, and soft descriptions that add nothing to the storyline. I've never had a time when a trimmed story didn't read better than an overstuffed one. But I guess that's a personal preference. Or a personal problem. ;)

I don't tend to over-describe, quite the reverse. I tend to go through my manuscripts adding descriptions. Then I have to go and trim out a bunch of weasle words like "Well" and "almost" and "started to" and stuff like that that is needed in some places, but not nearly as often as I use them. Usually the stuff I take out during revision just about equals the amount I put in, and my manuscripts remain pretty close to the same size they started. Sometimes, however, I have to do major cuts because my plot kind of meandered off course, for a bit.

Until I started posting here I could never write anything shorter than a novel. :-) Short stories were never my thing. But with the contests and challenges, and the poetry challenges, I'm learning to write short, and find that I like it. But I know what you mean, pakled. I thought my piece read a little choppy too, after all the edits. And all the neat research I did on the Spanish Civil War, the Punic Wars, and Carthage largely got left in the bit bucket. I did keep the longer version of the story, though, and may even expand on it some day. I found I liked my characters and would not mind working them up some more. jon

I may be a little overly protective of readers, but I often find that the research that fascinates the writer is detail that slows a story to a dead stop and isn't all that fascinating to read. I trust you, Jon, to make almost anything interesting, but I have read books where I skipped whole chapters of what I'm sure was fascinating information to the writer that just made me impatient. Research and detail is great if it adds to the storyline. If not, it shouldn't be there. I didn't think either of your stories read as choppy. You might be surprised that your favorite piece of information is viewed differently from a reader's angle. Of course I could be wrong. I often am. I accept that.

Oh, you're right. Research inserted as research is dreadfully boring, more often than not. I've skimmed over big chunks of books too, for that very reason. Even books and authors that I like. (Kim Stanley Robinson can tend to over do it sometimes, yet he's my favorite SF author). I think research serves to give the author a solid background, to bring the characters and settings to life. And readers will jump all over an author that has inconsistencies in fact, like a blue jay on a June bug.. ;-) I needed to research the Spanish Civil War, for instance, because I wanted my story to take place just outside of Spanish Morocco, after WWII but before the independence of Morocco. But by the time the story got cut down to size, the reader has no idea where it is taking place, except in some mountains, until the very last paragraph (where I did manage to mention Spanish Morocco). Why Spanish Morocco? Well that ties in to my research on Carthage, and the Punic Wars. And so on... jon

I think I got rid of most of the adjectives, adverbs, ands, buts, ors, etc., and had to delete a coupla scenes as well. Here's what I propose, if it's ok, and doesn't violate the rules; I kept the original, wordy version, and should I not win or place, I'll post it as an attachment to a thread (you can attach .txt files to a thread, provided they're not over 200k) and see how it flies..;)

I think research is great for the writer to have. I think it doesn't all need to spill out onto the page. I think that's a great idea, pakled. I don't think anyone would mind having the opportunity to read your original if you don't have another commitment to the magazine. :)

If you sprinkle in tidbits here and there, the research works well. It's those 8 paragraph blocks explaining what a schnerble is and it's importance in world history that kill a story. Personally, I find the short challenges and contests a nice break as they force me to look at my writing and how to chop things down. It's also a way to look more objectively at how I write because these aren't as dear to me as my novels. And we'll find out the winners very soon now. Very soon indeed. Those who aren't being published in issue #7 are more than welcome to post their original length stories in the forum. Cheers!