menu: home / about / links

Hot Off the Grill

7.02.2009:

I, for one, welcome our new ant overlords.

All hail the queen!

Labels: links, news

Posted at 9:12 AM // 0 comments

7.01.2009:

Submission Shouldn't Entail Submission

Really nice rejection from GUD Magazine this morning, after the story in question was short-listed:

Hi Phoebe It was a really hard decision to send this piece back to you as I thoroughly enjoyed reading it. Unfortunately I don't have room for it in my issue. A lovely retelling, though. Best of luck with this piece in other markets. Sincerely, Debbie Moorhouse

Sweet, right? I'll be shipping the same story off to Strange Horizons, I think, as soon as I get home.

When I first started sending out work, I didn't really appreciate the importance of nice rejections. Mostly, I just felt burned. Now, though, particularly as I've been sending out work to "bigger" (i.e. paying) markets, nice rejections are a little rarer. Generally, I'm starting to appreciate certain things about publishers. Namely, the type of consideration they seem to give your work, how easy (or difficult) they make it to submit to them, an absence of border-line insulting form letters. Form letters, I understand, are a necessity. But the ones with the little jabs--I'm looking at you, Ploughshares ("We regret that the manuscript you submitted does not fit our current editorial needs." Yeah, I regret it too.)--just really get to me. They don't strike me as particularly respectful.

I've talked about this before, but I generally don't send out mail submissions. There is really no reason for this other than laziness. It's work to do so, and the sort of work that is easily put off. That's simply not true of places that accept online submissions. I'm not saying that the work of sending writing out isn't necessarily worth it, only that it's easy to procrastinate on when there are more attractive alternatives (namely, believe it or not, writing) available, or when there are easier submission systems available. I can't tell you how many times in the last year I've meant to submit to some place that only takes mailed submissions only to find an equally high-quality and reputable market that takes online submissions.

And I appreciate that the editors in question want to make it easy for me to contact them. Like considerately written form rejections, it makes me feel valued. In fact, I've often heard editors cite one common argument against online submission systems: that they cause too many people to submit. Somehow, I fail to see that as a problem--and I've read slush before! More submissions mean more crap, sure, but undoubtedly it also means that more quality writers will be approaching markets they wouldn't otherwise consider. That, to me, is a good thing.

And it could be naive of me, but I have trouble seeing how it could possibly be a bad thing for an editor. I assume that editors are in it, in part, to discover new and exciting writing--not to hold the golden gates of publication closed from the slush-stained masses. I assume that editors value their writers' time and contributions, even when that expenditure of time--on either side--doesn't result in a sale.

I assume, I assume, I assume.

Labels: fiction, literary world, magazines, publication

Posted at 2:22 PM // 0 comments

6.29.2009:

Goodreads Review: Grass

Grass by Sheri S. Tepper

My review

rating: 3 of 5 stars

In her Pern novels, Anne McCaffrey introduced readers to telepathic dragons who bond psychically with humans. In her Valdemar series, Mercedes Lackey introduced readers to telepathic horses who bond psychically with humans. In Grass Sherri S. Tepper plays on the same theme, introducing telepathic fox . . . things who have . . . psychic sex (I think?) with humans.

Okay, so it's not quite the same. But Tepper is dabbling with a well-known science fiction and fantasy trope here. The Grassian nobility participate in the hunt, a version of the English fox hunt where all the animals are both alien and slightly horrific. During the hunt, strangely sexual things happen and young girls often disappear. Yet because of their bonds with their mounts the Hippae, the Grassians turn a blind eye until they are forced to pay attention when the daughter of a Terran ambassador disappears.

The development of the details of the hunt is slow and suspenseful. They're paired with gorgeous prose and strong character development. Majorie Westriding is a wonderful feminist heroine and the supporting characters are just as finely rendered. Several exiled monks who round out the cast stand out in my mind as terrifically, realistically, and subtly written.

Unfortunately, though, Grass is otherwise an uneven experience. The plot moves painfully slowly through the first two hundred pages; it was only the mystery of the hunt that kept me reading. And, even more unfortunately, the truth of the hunt never quite congealed for me into something satisfying or even particularly believable. The relationship between the Hippae and the Foxen or even these species and humans is unclear (okay, so they're the same species, but what exactly do the Hippae need the humans for?), the evolutionary science dubious, and the connection between this mystery and a plague subplot really poorly done. Too bad. Tepper's prose is fine enough that I'll probably pick up the next novel in the series, but I have a limited tolerance for science fiction that isn't believable even within its own framework, so hopefully I won't find the same there.

View all my reviews.

Labels: feminism, goodreads, review, scifi

Posted at 5:28 PM // 2 comments

6.22.2009:

Oh my petticoat!

Yeah, yeah, yeah, bad luck to see the "bride" in her dress before "her" day, yadda yadda yadda. I'm too excited about this not to share.

Now that that's settled, I can move on to less important things, like . . . uh, vows.

Labels: photos, vanity, wedding

Posted at 7:45 PM // 2 comments

6.21.2009:

Goodreads Review: Offbeat Bride

Offbeat Bride: Taffeta-Free Alternatives for Independent Brides by Ariel Meadow Stallings

My review

rating: 3 of 5 stars

I guess my review of this book can double as an announcement: Jordan and I have set the date for a tiny, quirky wedding on October 10th! Man, those are some words I never thought I'd say. Initially, I really wanted to elope, bypassing the whole wedding planning fervor completely. But he, fairly, wanted to include some friends and family into the hullabaloo. So instead of focusing on private, whispered vows, I'm turning to places like indiebride and offbeatbrides to provide some guidance into this daunting task: creating a big ol' party in less than four months but also to still stay true to ourselves.

If you haven't looked at it, the Offbeat Bride blog is pretty impressive--lots of resources, an active community, creative ideas, and plenty of "wedding porn" (photos). I was pleased to find blogger Ariel Meadow Stalling's book at the library. In it, she discusses each stage of the wedding planning process in a brief, warmly written chapter. You get real insight into her own relationship and wedding.

Unfortunately, I think the information on the blog itself is presented in a much better, richer way. There are no photos here; the pages are thin and the font huge. It's clear from her style of writing that these are lifted right off of a blog. What seems fun and engaging in blog format just feels a bit . . . well, childish, when laid out in very thin (2-3 page) chapters with huge margins. And she goes on a bit too much about her own wedding. You're ravers. Your mom loves humanure. We get the point! It's not that it's not funny. Mostly, it just didn't feel relevant. I want really want solid pointers, not anecdotes! Do I really have to hire someone to brew coffee for thirty people at the end of the wedding, or do I just buy a bunch of urns?! Or rent them? These questions weigh heavy on my mind right now, unfortunately.

My biggest qualm with her writing style, though, is to name drop other "offbeat brides" (friends?) without providing context. I guess these are connections she made through her blog, but that's never really made clear.

Despite all of this, reading the book itself was reassuring--you can have a wedding that's not part of the whole wedding industry behemoth. Though a lot of the stuff that Stallings talks about seems fairly self-evident, when you're in the thick of it (and fielding questions about why you're not getting a rabbi!), I suppose you can't really be reassured enough.

View all my reviews.

Labels: goodreads, relationships, review, wedding

Posted at 8:37 PM // 3 comments

And the card attached would say "Thank you for being a friend!"

There's gotta be at least one flattering photo of each of us here.

A terrific group of ladies, and writers, plus one cranky boy-child! Tarah, the other night Charlotte told me some boy at school told her she pretends too much; I think she's destined to grow up to be one of us.

You guys have really made the last two years for me. Claire, miss you already! Hope your trip is going well.

Labels: friends, MFA, photos

Posted at 8:14 PM // 2 comments

6.20.2009:

Theory

I have a theory:

that nuggets of all sorts (such as VeggiePatch spinach nuggets, pictured) exist only a a means of delivery honey to my mouth.

Labels: eating in, photos, solitary eating

Posted at 7:48 PM // 0 comments

About Phoebe, Eating.

Phoebe is an omnivore. Her favorite foods include chili dogs all-the-way, dark chocolate, savory soups, swiss cheese, raspberry sorbet, Fuji apples, tangellos, soft pretzels, onion rings, dragon rolls, tuna sandwiches, steamed broccoli, her mother's matzah ball soup, and kettle corn.