Analog Submissions

I don't know what length or subject matter they are, but over on AbsoluteWrite two different people have posted today (or maybe it was yesterday) who have 120+ day subs out at Analog, so if you are under serious consideration, it could be a long wait!

I have a story there right now that's at a whole ... wait for it ... 1 day out. At nearly 8,000 words, it's definitely not flash though.

I just got a 36 day form rejection from Analog for a flash fiction story

I was surprised it was there so long but had forgotten about Thanksgiving - which we don't celebrate in NZ. The story wasn't a great fit for Analog but you can't blame me for trying it out

A few notes about 'my' magazine....

1) Flash fiction only works if it's done for the Probability Zero column. Alastair Mayer, who occasionally comes around here -- and who pro'd out of the Contest -- has published several PZ pieces, so he's a good resource on what makes a PZ piece tick. I suck at that length, so I never even attempt it.

2) Stan told me in e-mail earlier this year that he's been quite behind on the slush, due to scheduling and time constraints. He's catching up very, very slowly, but 60-90 days on manuscripts aren't that uncommon right now. Even for those of us who are 'regulars' with the magazine.

3) Analog magazine used to be Astounding, which was the flagship of John W. Campbell, the editor who brought men like Robert Heinlein to the field in the middle of the last century. Campbell demanded a certain scientific rigor in his material, and that sentiment has never left the magazine. My experience is that Stan Schmidt likes you to have some kind of interesting, unique, or otherwise well-extrapolated scientific conceit at the core of the story. Which is not to say you can't get creative or adventurous, you just have to tie it back to that scientific idea, principle, speculation, etc.

4) Best homework for understanding Analog's needs, is to read the magazine. Barnes & Noble carries them in the magazines section. You may have to hunt for them, but they're usually kept down with the artsy-fartsy literature journals and other writerly-literature publications, often on a lower shelf. Do pick up a copy or two, if you've never read Analog before.

For a fun look at Analog's long history -- it's the oldest and longest-lived science fiction magazine in the English language -- take a look at this link:

http://www.philsp.com/mags/analog.html

Every! Cover! Ever! Look at the names on those covers. Lots and lots and LOTS of people came up through Analog, including some that might surprise you.

Of course, this is my favorite cover of all time:

Hey all,

I'm going to post the "turn around" times I've had at Analog.

1st Submission: 29 Days (R)
2nd Submission: 25 Days (R)
3rd Submission: 31 Days (R)
4th Submission: 46 Days (R)
5th Submission: 30 Days (R)
6th Submission: Submitted on the 30th of November

These stories were anywhere from 3,400 to 4,500 words. I haven't yet sent them anything longer or shorter.

2) Stan told me in e-mail earlier this year that he's been quite behind on the slush, due to scheduling and time constraints. He's catching up very, very slowly, but 60-90 days on manuscripts aren't that uncommon right now. Even for those of us who are 'regulars' with the magazine.

I can understand this -- and I do! -- and still get antsy when I start to see results flowing in again. I wanna crack that market so bad, I can taste it!

3) Analog magazine used to be Astounding, which was the flagship of John W. Campbell, the editor who brought men like Robert Heinlein to the field in the middle of the last century. Campbell demanded a certain scientific rigor in his material, and that sentiment has never left the magazine. My experience is that Stan Schmidt likes you to have some kind of interesting, unique, or otherwise well-extrapolated scientific conceit at the core of the story. Which is not to say you can't get creative or adventurous, you just have to tie it back to that scientific idea, principle, speculation, etc.

Let me tell you of my first exposure to Analog. It wasn't actually the magazine, it was an anthology (only one volume, I believe) called Analog Annual. I read it probably 35 years ago; and one story has stuck with me clearly ever since: "Fighting Madness" by P.J. Plauger. (Yes, programmers, that P.J. Plauger.) In one critical scene, the protagonist has been sabotaged. He's out in space, separated from his ship without a tether. He was doing maintenance work, and now he's lost. He should be doomed. After all, all he has on him is his tools and a bag of bolts.

So what does he do? He starts calculating masses and angles; and as hard as he can, he tosses those tools and bolts away, one at a time. And conservation of momentum therefore gives him a slight but critical thrust back in the direction of his ship. When his last bolt is gone, he has to drift toward the ship and hope his air will last.

That, my friends, is the quintessential Analog story. Action and excitement, and the only thing between you and certain death is physics.

4) Best homework for understanding Analog's needs, is to read the magazine. Barnes & Noble carries them in the magazines section. You may have to hunt for them, but they're usually kept down with the artsy-fartsy literature journals and other writerly-literature publications, often on a lower shelf.

Maybe. My local B&N no longer has any digest magazines at all.

But you can also order back issues directly: "Analog sells recent back issues directly from the editorial offices. Simply send an email to [email protected] requesting the issues you'd like. We will then get back to you with availability, prices (generally cover price with ship costs), and where to send your payment."

Of course, this is my favorite cover of all time:

Don't be shy, Brad!

And since Brad is a little shy about his story, for those that don't have an Analog subscription, run, do not walk to your local bookstore and get a copy of that Analog. Brad's story is a big bag full of awesome.

And since Brad is a little shy about his story, for those that don't have an Analog subscription, run, do not walk to your local bookstore and get a copy of that Analog. Brad's story is a big bag full of awesome.

In interviews, Brad has mentioned how he's tired of downer SF and wants to fight that trend.

First, that makes him my hero.

And second, this story is a great example of how he's fighting it. Yes, it is a big bag full of awesome.

I'll add in my own little plug for Brad here.

When I picked up my copy of Analog at an electronics store (of all places), I didn't know who Brad was and I had only the dimmest notion that I might be giving this writing thing a whirl. I'd run a story through Critters, was working on a second one, and I knew if I was serious, I'd need to get back into the literature in its short form. So while the hubs and the kid prowled the aisles, I grabbed a copy of Asimov's and Analog and settled into the in-house cafe.

I've been in a submarine before, and I loved Brad's story. It left me with that feeling of boundless possibility, though not without the promise of hard work. And that was darn near the perfect place to leave a person who's been flirting with the idea of writing.

A few weeks later, I showed up here, and whose name do I see all bold and green? Well, that cemented it.

So now you're all stuck with me!

Y'all are making me blush!

I didn't intend for this thread to become a Brad R. Torgersen infomercial.

Seriously, I am pleased that "Ray of Light" has been doing so well with so many readers. I've had a few old-time pros tell me quietly that they've given it their nod, for the fresh awards season. We'll see if it picks up any traction with the Nebulas, the Hugos, or helps me towards a Campbell.

Awards aside, like I said in the Brass Tacks at the back of the December issue, I shall strive to match the high bar.

For those of you overseas who might worry (as I do) about paper copies lost in transit, you can e-subscribe to Asimov's, Analog, and F&SF through Amazon's Kindle store.

For those of you overseas who might worry (as I do) about paper copies lost in transit, you can e-subscribe to Asimov's, Analog, and F&SF through Amazon's Kindle store.

And F&SF is super cheap. Only $0.99 per month which makes for an easy subscription if you have a Kindle. They've even been adding the back issues to the subscription so it's *more* than just that issue every two months. I really hope the other mags go to that lower sub rate. I'm already subscribed to Asimov's and Analog, but it'd be nice to get them cheaper on the Kindle!

For those of you overseas who might worry (as I do) about paper copies lost in transit, you can e-subscribe to Asimov's, Analog, and F&SF through Amazon's Kindle store.

And F&SF is super cheap. Only $0.99 per month which makes for an easy subscription if you have a Kindle. They've even been adding the back issues to the subscription so it's *more* than just that issue every two months. I really hope the other mags go to that lower sub rate. I'm already subscribed to Asimov's and Analog, but it'd be nice to get them cheaper on the Kindle!

Oh, wow, this is awesome. Will have to subscribe to them again, in e-form.

My own track record of rejections from Analog:

1) 48 days -- Form. Went on to become my first pro sale elsewhere.
2) 35 days -- From.
3) 32 days -- Form.
4) 50 days -- Personal. Went on to become my second pro sale elsewhere.
5) 42 days -- Form.
6) 14 days -- Form.
7) 25 days -- Form.
8) 12 days -- Personal.
9) 44 days -- Form.

The only thing I glean from this data is that response times vary, and are not in and of themselves indicative of anything other than the response time. Form vs. Personal obviously isn't an indicator of future salability, either.

The first couple on the list were pre e-subs, so you want to subtract a couple of days from those times for dead-tree transit.

Brad, is this the current issue that your Ray of Light is in? I'm heading over to my Kindle right now to look and see. I'm way behind on my blog and forum news reading. Congratulations!

a big clue might be on the web form where you can see your submission status. it'll say "closed" instead of submitted or rejected. I say this because at 90 days I queried and they said it was still under consideration. I'm at 122 days right now and am trying not to read too much into it... after all, i still have my Q1 to revise.

a big clue might be on the web form where you can see your submission status. it'll say "closed" instead of submitted or rejected. I say this because at 90 days I queried and they said it was still under consideration. I'm at 122 days right now and am trying not to read too much into it... after all, i still have my Q1 to revise.

122 days? Yowtch! I've had 60 there, but no longer.

I've been avoiding this thread because it smells of rejectomancy, and I try not to encourage that habit. Not in you, in me: I've decided that it can do me no good, so I want to avoid it any way possible. But since you're interested, I'll give my results.

Rejection, Form 37 days ("The Night We Flushed the Old Town", eventually published in Digital Science Fiction Anthology 2)

Rejection, Form 23 days

Rejection, Personal 28 days (The Mother Anthony)

Rejection, Personal 66 days

Pending Response 51 days

Hmmm.

I only have two submissions to report since Analog went to online subs.

41 days - form reject
pending... currently at 24 days

Such a lazy gator....

Such a lazy gator....

Winter does that to me, too. Must be the cold-blooded thing...

I've been avoiding this thread because it smells of rejectomancy, and I try not to encourage that habit. Not in you, in me: I've decided that it can do me no good, so I want to avoid it any way possible.

Isn't rejectomancy when you reject yourself by not submitting? your use of the term implies another meaning....?

I've been avoiding this thread because it smells of rejectomancy, and I try not to encourage that habit. Not in you, in me: I've decided that it can do me no good, so I want to avoid it any way possible.

Isn't rejectomancy when you reject yourself by not submitting? your use of the term implies another meaning....?

My understanding of "rejectomancy" is trying to read the tea leaves in a non-personal rejection based on such things as how long the rejection took, the wording of the form rejection, etc.

Related to that is Duotropery, the practice of trying to read the tea leaves based on how long your story has been in the queue, especially in relation to other stories that have already been rejected or accepted.

Both are attempts to eek out meaning where little or none is to be found. And to me, it's more productive to ignore the outstanding stories as much as possible, send rejected stories out to the next market, and concentrate on the next story.

A personal rejection is different. That's real feedback I can learn from. But the rest of it I can't learn from, only obsess over; and I have too many obsessions as it is.

ah I understand, thank you. I agree as well. I think though the more subs a person has out there, the less likely they are to engage in such behavior. 😉

My favourite of all these 'fringe' arts is one that I use often. It can be applied to ALL aspects of your life, and has a 100% accuracy guarantee - EVERY time.

It's Hindsightology.

All you do is wait till an event has passed, and then blithely say, "I knew that was going to happen."

Practical example? This morning Analog screwed up big time, by rejecting my brilliant writings.

"Oh, that's a shame," my wife said.
"It's OK," I said. "I knew they wouldn't take it."

See? It works every time.

Steve

My favourite of all these 'fringe' arts is one that I use often. It can be applied to ALL aspects of your life, and has a 100% accuracy guarantee - EVERY time.

It's Hindsightology.

The other virtue of Hindsightology is you're never disappointed.

Practical example? This morning Analog screwed up big time, by rejecting my brilliant writings.

Ah, sorry to hear that. Next time!

Practical example? This morning Analog screwed up big time, by rejecting my brilliant writings.

Ah, sorry to hear that. Next time!

Thanks Martin, but it's OK. You see I knew it was going to happen..... 😉

(Is it a personal or a form rejection when they say "Sorry, we cannot use this at the moment. Torgersen has the next 10 issues booked out.....)

But seriously, it really is a good story, and will definitely find a home. And it's already back out in the wilderness....

cheers

Steve

(Is it a personal or a form rejection when they say "Sorry, we cannot use this at the moment. Torgersen has the next 10 issues booked out.....)

See, I almost made a Brad joke in my comment, but I decided against it at the last minute. I'm glad you made the follow-through!

My rejections usually say, "This was a very good story, but Eric James Stone and Carl Fredrick already turned in similar stories to me earlier -- I am going to pass."

"Sorry, we cannot use this at the moment. Torgersen has the next 10 issues booked out.....)

Bwhahahaha!

. . .

I don't have anything useful to add to this conversation. My science fiction is all soft and gooey.

(Is it a personal or a form rejection when they say "Sorry, we cannot use this at the moment. Torgersen has the next 10 issues booked out.....)

Woah! Was I thinking that, or did I say it out loud....?

Just as well Brad ain't around to see it.....

Steve

Geez, mine usually say, "Please go play in traffic." Pffft! 😉