Business Note Re: Anthologies

I’m getting a fair number of invitations to write for short story anthologies these days, which is very gratifying to the ego. But I’ve plotted out my writing obligations for the next year (actually 15 months) and what I’ve discovered is that I actually have absolutely no more bandwidth. If I try to jam any additional short fiction work into the work I’ve already committed to (novels, non-fiction books, commissioned short work, editing gigs and a couple of personal projects none of you will know about until they happen, if they happen at all), something might snap, and I’m afraid that the thing that might snap is my sanity.

So: I am not accepting any anthology invitations through July 2009. If you’re editing an anthology whose stories are due between now and July 2009, you can skip asking me to participate, because the answer will be “no.” The exception to this would be reprint anthologies, i.e., anthologies where I’m not required to do any additional work. But as for original work: Sorry, can’t. Thanks for thinking of me, though. Please note this does not mean I don’t have some short fiction planned between now and July 2009; I do, and it’s on the schedule, as noted. I just can’t add any more.

This bums me out a little because some of the anthologies I’ve been invited to are really cool. But I’d rather say no than say yes, and then, by dint of lack of bandwidth, turn in something sucktastical. There are limits to my hackery, and I think we can all be grateful for that.

7 Comments on “Business Note Re: Anthologies”

  1. Damn! Just when I got funding for my Sclazi/Wheaton slash fic anthology. All stories had to include the above, with generous funding from Oscar Meyer and Guinness, each story had to include numerous references to bacon and stout, no matter how they were used.

    Oh, well. I guess I could call Laurel K. Hamilton and ask her for a different idea…

  2. Sorry, that came off as way to snarky. I am sorry you can’t contribute as it’s nice to see some short fiction get written especially if it’s your stuff. None of the big three seems to get the “electronic submissions” thing might get them some of your work.

    I better stop before the caffeine kicks in.

  3. Is the addition of “al” to sucktastic grammatically necessary? I was not able to find sucktastical on, but there is an entry for sucktastic. Plus, spoken aloud, sucktastical sounds entirely inappropriate.

    That being said, here is the definition given.


    Description of something that has achieved a new and ultimate level of sucking, such that there is almost something fantastic about it. Also see: craptacular, pukeriffic

  4. Which leaves me wondering, how do you plan such a thing as writing: do you have a base rate of words / pages per day, and then leave some room for gliches, lack of inspiration, half-rabbit/cat blogging moments, etc…?
    And is there such a thing as a moving horizon: as you advance in your 15 month planning, the closer you get to starting to write, the more “real” the story ideas get in your mind?

  5. Tudor @ 3: I’ve always liked “barfogenic,” especially as applied to bad movies.

  6. You need to hire someone to write these stories for you, and just edit them!

  7. The “al”s have to go on the back of “sucktastic” because John ripped them off the front of all those “together”s. Can’t have them sitting around cluttering up his desk.

%d bloggers like this: