Pay Markets in the 'Sub-SemiPro' Range...

I'm posting this here instead of at Fantastique Unfettered because --while I have FU in mind-- this is my point of view and in the process of considering a related subject --editorial vision-- I realize that my definition for editorial success in terms of quality content cannot essentially be equal to 'what I like' or 'what I think'.

So, FU and Nithska are two separate entities.  The one is a periodical of 'fantastic fiction' that I will edit initially, the other a tool for helping to connect readers to my writing.  While I'll probably never write a 'bad-ass chick kicking supernatural booty' tale, FU might publish one, if it seemed to do something interesting in that sub-genre (which as become a glut on the SF aisle shelf of late).

In researching what others have to say about editing and publishing genre fiction, I've come across ideas that challenged my preconceptions (VanderMeer in particular has some great thoughts about editorial vision being more than 'stuff I like'), and others that I feel conflicted about.  In particular I'm thinking of the ruckus around comments from John Scalzi last year, essentially skewering the entire 'sub-semipro' pay markets.

The fact is I agree: writers should get paid for their work, and paid well.  SFWA pro rates, in real world terms, are laughable.   $250 per pop for a 5k word story is not bankin'.  As an IT guy, I could do far better doing extra contract work in my spare time than what I make writing stories, even if I were making pro rates on every sale, which I'm not.

I'd rather write stories.

I get why a writer at Scalzi's level has this attitude.  He makes a living at the gig, and is well-paid for his work. Why should he consider anything less?  The 'pay markets' look ridiculous from his point of view.

More than that, they undermine an already shaky publishing world, making it harder to support markets that charge for content and in turn pay pro rates.

And yet...

Scalzi's path is impressive and to be admired.  It's not the norm.  I don't think anyone should settle for less (send your story to the highest-paying market you feel will accept it, and work down from there).  I'm also of the opinion that a sale is a sale,  though if you are going to let something go for a token amount, I'd suggest you do so with an outfit that you believe is worthwhile, doing interesting things, and going to improve with time.  "Ah, he's grinding his little pay-market axe."  Well, just a second...

I have not made a professional sale yet, so it is a fair counterpoint to say, "Of course THIS GUY's going to like the so-called pay markets."  Snarky, but fair.

I've worked hard to get whatever skill I might have as a writer.  I placed in the 'top twenty' of Brain Harvest's Mega Challenge (according to the editors) and have received feedback from pro-level editors telling me the writing is good enough, but it's just not the one for them. Since form letters are the norm, I take them at face value.  It's also a fair statement to say that I may not have exhausted all the pro markets a given story might have fit before moving on to semi & pay markets.

Mistake or not, selling that first story to Byzarium --for instance-- was pure ecstasy.  Call me a fool: I was quite happy.  The Fourth Horseman is not a story I've looked at recently, so when I do to create the link, I might feel that it is not as refined a story as I would now write.  But it's honest and an interesting tale, and told well enough that I'd stand by the statement that it would not jump out from rank inadequacy if sandwiched between a couple SFWA pro's work.

There is good fiction out there that is getting turned away from the pro markets and eventually finding a home in the nooks and crannies of the short genre fiction ecosystem.  Writers should be paid, and paid well --I can rally around that--, and the 'mom & pop's of the publishing world have their place.

I liken it to the 'Cathedral vs. Bazaar' dichotomy applied to the fiction markets.  There is nothing inherently wrong with the Cathedrals.  But I can't open one.  A little shop in the bazaar?  Yeah, that I can set up and do some good work and pay my artisans good money in turn.  It's a bottom up approach instead of top down.  It means I have to build up the business (unless the grant or other funding comes through).  While I agree with much of Scalzi's point of view, the part that I don't is this sense that only big businesses or the people with deep pockets are entitled to serve fiction to readers.  That's as ridiculous as 'pay markets'.

But how do you reconcile these two?

Fantastique Unfettered is my answer.  The $10 token rate you'll see now on the guidelines is about to be replaced by something better.  It still won't be what I want it to be.  But this I can promise you: paying writers good rates is the back-end primary goal for FU (the front end goal is serving readers great fiction).  See the grant proposal linked from the recent blog post.  Look at the plan described therein to see what we would like to do.  We have more funding efforts in the offing.

Now, through the time that we incorporate as a nonprofit, we will run it with the integrity expected of such an enterprise.  Through that time (maybe beyond it), this is funded and ran by a few people with a vision, but this is not a hobby.  It's a passion.  That might sound silly and worthy of the scorn of people making .37 cents a word for their fiction, but I'd suggest there is room for the markets paying that sort of rate, and for emerging markets like M-Brane SF & FU.

Expect 'pay markets' to strive to pay authors competitive rates?  Spot on.  Small press efforts unable to pay pro rates out of the gates should pack it in: elitist.