August 24th, 2010 / 1:37 pm
Snippets

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.

80 Comments

  1. Lincoln

      The fact that it last longer can be a negative though. I definitely wish I hadn’t published any of my early writings online.

  2. Jak Cardini

      kinda agree with ya there lincoln

  3. 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.

  4. Roxane

      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.

  5. AndreaDrygas

      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…

  6. Lincoln

      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?”

  7. Nick Antosca

      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.

  8. Jak Cardini

      yea, ive got a piece on word riot that ive come close to asking them to take down. haha.

  9. Lincoln

      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.

  10. Bruiser Brody

      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.

  11. Bruiser Brody

      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.

  12. Lincoln

      That’s a fair point too. (Luckily) a few of my earliest online pieces were at sites that closed down.

  13. Nick Antosca

      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.

  14. Bruiser Brody

      Indeed, I should have added the word “luckily.”

  15. Nick Antosca

      (Don’t set yourself on fire, please.)

  16. AndreaDrygas

      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…).

  17. Bruiser Brody

      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?

  18. Bruiser Brody

      That was a sad, pathetic actually, homage to “Fires.” That would be a great movie.

  19. Lincoln

      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).

  20. AndreaDrygas

      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.

  21. Roxane

      And if your house burns down you lose the physical copies. Nothing is permanent.

  22. Nick Antosca

      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.

  23. Bruiser Brody

      No bleepin’ way, dude. I know some guys that love that book. Barry Graham loves that book.

  24. Bruiser Brody

      Uh oh, didn’t mean to make that sound like Barry and guys are mutually exclusive.

  25. Lincoln

      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.

  26. jackie corley

      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.

  27. karl taro greenfeld

      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

  28. Lincoln

      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.

  29. Sean

      I’m in.

  30. Sean

      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.

  31. Lincoln

      The fact that it last longer can be a negative though. I definitely wish I hadn’t published any of my early writings online.

  32. deadgod

      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?

  33. Jak Cardini

      kinda agree with ya there lincoln

  34. Nick Antosca

      Well, not novels, that’s for sure. Yeah, I suppose I had short stories in mind (<7000 words, say) when I posted this.

  35. 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.

  36. Sean

      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

  37. Lincoln

      Anything longer than like 500 words my technology-diseased brain probably can’t read online without clicking on a dozen other tabs.

  38. Roxane

      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.

  39. AndreaDrygas

      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…

  40. Lincoln

      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?”

  41. Nick Antosca

      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.

  42. Jak Cardini

      yea, ive got a piece on word riot that ive come close to asking them to take down. haha.

  43. Lincoln

      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.

  44. Bruiser Brody

      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.

  45. Bruiser Brody

      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.

  46. Lincoln

      That’s a fair point too. (Luckily) a few of my earliest online pieces were at sites that closed down.

  47. Nick Antosca

      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.

  48. Bruiser Brody

      Indeed, I should have added the word “luckily.”

  49. Nick Antosca

      (Don’t set yourself on fire, please.)

  50. AndreaDrygas

      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…).

  51. Bruiser Brody

      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?

  52. Bruiser Brody

      That was a sad, pathetic actually, homage to “Fires.” That would be a great movie.

  53. Lincoln

      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).

  54. AndreaDrygas

      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.

  55. Roxane

      And if your house burns down you lose the physical copies. Nothing is permanent.

  56. Nick Antosca

      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.

  57. Bruiser Brody

      No bleepin’ way, dude. I know some guys that love that book. Barry Graham loves that book.

  58. Bruiser Brody

      Uh oh, didn’t mean to make that sound like Barry and guys are mutually exclusive.

  59. Lincoln

      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.

  60. jackie corley

      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.

  61. geospiza finch

      We get it. We get it. You’re in love with the internet.

  62. karl taro greenfeld

      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

  63. Lincoln

      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.

  64. Sean

      I’m in.

  65. Sean

      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.

  66. deadgod

      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?

  67. Nick Antosca

      Well, not novels, that’s for sure. Yeah, I suppose I had short stories in mind (<7000 words, say) when I posted this.

  68. Sean

      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

  69. Lincoln

      Anything longer than like 500 words my technology-diseased brain probably can’t read online without clicking on a dozen other tabs.

  70. geospiza finch

      We get it. We get it. You’re in love with the internet.

  71. mike

      [blockquote]It [online] lasts longer [than print][/blockquote]

      This is debatable as fuck.

  72. mike

      also I suck at using “tags”

  73. mike

      meant to do one of these thingys

  74. Michael

      [blockquote]It [online] lasts longer [than print][/blockquote]

      This is debatable as fuck.

  75. Michael

      also I suck at using “tags”

  76. Michael

      meant to do one of these thingys

  77. Richard

      Love this.

  78. jackie corley

      very true

  79. Richard

      Love this.

  80. jackie corley

      very true