August 24th, 2010 / 1:37 pm
Snippets
Snippets
Nick Antosca—
All other things (like payment, for example) being equal, at this point I’d rather have short fiction published online than in a print magazine. It lasts longer, it’s accessible to more readers, and typos can be fixed.
The fact that it last longer can be a negative though. I definitely wish I hadn’t published any of my early writings online.
kinda agree with ya there lincoln
The worst part is there is no context with online fiction. If you go buy an old print magazine someone was in you will know what year it was published (and thus when they wrote it roughly) and any theme or constraints that the issue put on the piece. Online, you just google someone’s name and if the story comes up it comes up and you don’t really see when it was published or anything else about it.
That’s interesting, Lincoln. I’m not really ashamed of my early writing. It’s not good but writers grow and I don’t have a problem with my work revealing that.
I completely agree with your point Lincoln. I used to write a column for the town newspaper when I was a senior in high school, and boy am I glad that’s not floating around the internet. At least if someone finds it they can see the year printed on the page…
Well, see my post below. If anyone reading said work knew it was my early work and I’d outgrown it I wouldn’t think twice about it, but it is weird when someone comes up to you and is like “hey, i read this story you wrote about XYZ” and you are like “what? I wrote that 6 years ago, that’s the only thing you’ve read of mine?”
Really? I feel like things are usually dated… that said, I see the point of your earlier comment. Occasionally someone says, “I read your story online [like there’s just one]” and it’s something I wrote when I was 17, and I cringe a little.
yea, ive got a piece on word riot that ive come close to asking them to take down. haha.
I don’t think anyone actually looks at the date. Also I just looked up one (that I’m not embarrassed about) and there is no date on the page.
Ha ha, Nick, I guess you get published in online “zines” that don’t fold up shop. I’ve been published in many that are now offline and don’t even come up during a Google search.
I’ll set myself on fire now.
Are you advertising your story so we’ll go read it or are you being serious?
If the former, stop patronizing us, Jak. If the latter, just ask them already. I’m sure Jackie won’t hold being swindled against you.
That’s a fair point too. (Luckily) a few of my earliest online pieces were at sites that closed down.
A lot of stuff I published online before say, 2005, is gone. But I said it lasts longer, not forever. It’s a lot more likely someone today will read a story I published online in Identity Theory three years ago than a short story I published in a print magazine around the same time.
Indeed, I should have added the word “luckily.”
(Don’t set yourself on fire, please.)
Lincoln, I think that’s another good point against online publishing — what if the ‘zine folds and it was a story you were really proud of? What are you going to send people, an archived weblink? If a print magazine folds, at least you still have the copies (that you can choose to share, or not…).
Okay, yeah, that’s true, for sure.
I had a great story in print in March ’88 about Al Haig’s unsuccessful run. Just doesn’t hold up now. “The Simpsons,” however, did a great job a few years back of doing a “memory scene from ’88 and Bart (Homer?) was wearing a “Haig in ’88” shirt. I still laugh about that today. I’m actually laughing right now. Can you feel me?
That was a sad, pathetic actually, homage to “Fires.” That would be a great movie.
I’m not sure its really a point for or against online publication.
I think online publication is great. So is print. They are probably better for different things. If I get an interview published online probably far more people will read it. On the flip side, I’m not sure I’d want to publish a long short story online as I doubt many people would want to read that on a computer screen (lord knows I wouldn’t).
By point I guess I mean a consideration to take into account. There are pros and cons on both sides, and as you point out, certain writing will work better in different mediums.
And if your house burns down you lose the physical copies. Nothing is permanent.
I think that’s the first homage to ‘Fires’ (out of print, incidentally, because the print publisher folded up shop) that’s ever been made.
No bleepin’ way, dude. I know some guys that love that book. Barry Graham loves that book.
Uh oh, didn’t mean to make that sound like Barry and guys are mutually exclusive.
I dunno Roxane, I have one story that was burned into stainless steel with toxic waste and blasted into space in an airtight time capsule.
i think most online publishers are amenable to taking things down if the writer doesn’t like a piece much anymore.
i’ve fielded those requests several times.
but when are all things equal? you mean a story is accepted at the same time by two publications, one print and one online, both paying the same amount of money or, probably, both paying nothing and both being of commensurate stature? one pub, either the print or the online, would have a better reputation, mean more to the writer, or for some reason be deemed a better venue. for me, it has never come down to purely a matter of medium
This is very true. Online publication is great and there are lots of great online magazines out there. I was just musing on the notion of fiction lasting forever being necessarily a bonus.
I’m in.
And…
If I am thinking of buying your book I will Google you and look for online writing. It would be good to have some.
The fact that it last longer can be a negative though. I definitely wish I hadn’t published any of my early writings online.
But people who don’t themselves back up – in at least one of how many formats? – the material they post online that they want saved – well, hell: what were they thinking? If you published a book in paper and won a Most Magnificent Writer of the Year prize, wouldn’t you still keep original drafts and your own copies of the publication? If you treat any archive carelessly, who or what else is to blame for the oblivion of your contribution to it – than you??
I think Nick’s most salient point is “accessib[ility] to more readers”. If you want anyone to read the thing, and the mucky pelf is equal in every case – probably zero – , Nick’s preference (for online publication of short fiction) makes good sense.
Nick, only short fiction? Only fiction?
kinda agree with ya there lincoln
Well, not novels, that’s for sure. Yeah, I suppose I had short stories in mind (<7000 words, say) when I posted this.
The worst part is there is no context with online fiction. If you go buy an old print magazine someone was in you will know what year it was published (and thus when they wrote it roughly) and any theme or constraints that the issue put on the piece. Online, you just google someone’s name and if the story comes up it comes up and you don’t really see when it was published or anything else about it.
This is a good seg-way.
Are flash and poetry easier to read on the web? For me, yes.
I try to read long works often online. For some reason, I usually stop. I wonder if it’s the scrolling? Maybe this is why the book is such a good technology. Easy to hold and flip
Anything longer than like 500 words my technology-diseased brain probably can’t read online without clicking on a dozen other tabs.
That’s interesting, Lincoln. I’m not really ashamed of my early writing. It’s not good but writers grow and I don’t have a problem with my work revealing that.
I completely agree with your point Lincoln. I used to write a column for the town newspaper when I was a senior in high school, and boy am I glad that’s not floating around the internet. At least if someone finds it they can see the year printed on the page…
Well, see my post below. If anyone reading said work knew it was my early work and I’d outgrown it I wouldn’t think twice about it, but it is weird when someone comes up to you and is like “hey, i read this story you wrote about XYZ” and you are like “what? I wrote that 6 years ago, that’s the only thing you’ve read of mine?”
Really? I feel like things are usually dated… that said, I see the point of your earlier comment. Occasionally someone says, “I read your story online [like there’s just one]” and it’s something I wrote when I was 17, and I cringe a little.
yea, ive got a piece on word riot that ive come close to asking them to take down. haha.
I don’t think anyone actually looks at the date. Also I just looked up one (that I’m not embarrassed about) and there is no date on the page.
Ha ha, Nick, I guess you get published in online “zines” that don’t fold up shop. I’ve been published in many that are now offline and don’t even come up during a Google search.
I’ll set myself on fire now.
Are you advertising your story so we’ll go read it or are you being serious?
If the former, stop patronizing us, Jak. If the latter, just ask them already. I’m sure Jackie won’t hold being swindled against you.
That’s a fair point too. (Luckily) a few of my earliest online pieces were at sites that closed down.
A lot of stuff I published online before say, 2005, is gone. But I said it lasts longer, not forever. It’s a lot more likely someone today will read a story I published online in Identity Theory three years ago than a short story I published in a print magazine around the same time.
Indeed, I should have added the word “luckily.”
(Don’t set yourself on fire, please.)
Lincoln, I think that’s another good point against online publishing — what if the ‘zine folds and it was a story you were really proud of? What are you going to send people, an archived weblink? If a print magazine folds, at least you still have the copies (that you can choose to share, or not…).
Okay, yeah, that’s true, for sure.
I had a great story in print in March ’88 about Al Haig’s unsuccessful run. Just doesn’t hold up now. “The Simpsons,” however, did a great job a few years back of doing a “memory scene from ’88 and Bart (Homer?) was wearing a “Haig in ’88” shirt. I still laugh about that today. I’m actually laughing right now. Can you feel me?
That was a sad, pathetic actually, homage to “Fires.” That would be a great movie.
I’m not sure its really a point for or against online publication.
I think online publication is great. So is print. They are probably better for different things. If I get an interview published online probably far more people will read it. On the flip side, I’m not sure I’d want to publish a long short story online as I doubt many people would want to read that on a computer screen (lord knows I wouldn’t).
By point I guess I mean a consideration to take into account. There are pros and cons on both sides, and as you point out, certain writing will work better in different mediums.
And if your house burns down you lose the physical copies. Nothing is permanent.
I think that’s the first homage to ‘Fires’ (out of print, incidentally, because the print publisher folded up shop) that’s ever been made.
No bleepin’ way, dude. I know some guys that love that book. Barry Graham loves that book.
Uh oh, didn’t mean to make that sound like Barry and guys are mutually exclusive.
I dunno Roxane, I have one story that was burned into stainless steel with toxic waste and blasted into space in an airtight time capsule.
i think most online publishers are amenable to taking things down if the writer doesn’t like a piece much anymore.
i’ve fielded those requests several times.
We get it. We get it. You’re in love with the internet.
but when are all things equal? you mean a story is accepted at the same time by two publications, one print and one online, both paying the same amount of money or, probably, both paying nothing and both being of commensurate stature? one pub, either the print or the online, would have a better reputation, mean more to the writer, or for some reason be deemed a better venue. for me, it has never come down to purely a matter of medium
This is very true. Online publication is great and there are lots of great online magazines out there. I was just musing on the notion of fiction lasting forever being necessarily a bonus.
I’m in.
And…
If I am thinking of buying your book I will Google you and look for online writing. It would be good to have some.
But people who don’t themselves back up – in at least one of how many formats? – the material they post online that they want saved – well, hell: what were they thinking? If you published a book in paper and won a Most Magnificent Writer of the Year prize, wouldn’t you still keep original drafts and your own copies of the publication? If you treat any archive carelessly, who or what else is to blame for the oblivion of your contribution to it – than you??
I think Nick’s most salient point is “accessib[ility] to more readers”. If you want anyone to read the thing, and the mucky pelf is equal in every case – probably zero – , Nick’s preference (for online publication of short fiction) makes good sense.
Nick, only short fiction? Only fiction?
Well, not novels, that’s for sure. Yeah, I suppose I had short stories in mind (<7000 words, say) when I posted this.
This is a good seg-way.
Are flash and poetry easier to read on the web? For me, yes.
I try to read long works often online. For some reason, I usually stop. I wonder if it’s the scrolling? Maybe this is why the book is such a good technology. Easy to hold and flip
Anything longer than like 500 words my technology-diseased brain probably can’t read online without clicking on a dozen other tabs.
We get it. We get it. You’re in love with the internet.
[blockquote]It [online] lasts longer [than print][/blockquote]
This is debatable as fuck.
also I suck at using “tags”
[blockquote]It [online] lasts longer [than print][/blockquote]
This is debatable as fuck.
also I suck at using “tags”
Love this.
very true
Love this.
very true