Thursday, June 01, 2006

The Anthology Debate

Author and editor Shane Jiraiya Cummings has had his stick out to stir the hornet's nest over at his Smoke and Mirrors blog.

His post, regarding the number of 'themed' anthologies in the Australian small press at the moment, has gathered the usual amount of disagreeing comments that such posts attract. It is not an noxious post, and the replies (even though most are in total disagreement with Shane's arguments) are intelligent and totally lacking the usual vitriol that can sometimes accompany them.

It is interested then to see that the post has made it to ABC's Articulate blog.

I see the essence of Shane's post as encapsulated by the following statements;

  • "...we appear to have a slew of anthologies that boast fairly uninspiring work."

  • "...when I see one or two mid-list names as the top drawcards in an anthology, it really does make me question the inherent quality of that project"

  • "Also, when we're getting into such specific and specifically bizarre themes for anthologies [...], can such topics support a full anthology's worth of quality writing?"

  • "...the most successful themed anthologies are the ones with broad themes that can allow for lattitude."

  • "...commercially, unless there is a strong contingent of 'knowns' [known authors in the table of contents], the theme better be damn good to sell books."

I can't really disagree with some of what he is saying as both a reader and a writer.

As a Reader:
I know I base my purchases on whether the table of contents contains authors that I know and have enjoyed. Although I am VERY glad they exist, I can't afford every anthology out there, and so I must have some selection criteria;

Firstly, does the 'Theme' interest me? (If it is a themed anthology)

Second, if so does the table of contents include authors I know I'm likely to enjoy? If not, is the theme interesting enough for me to want to take a chance?

Third, is the editor/publisher known for their professionalism and enthusiasm for Australian Spec Fic? (This only if I'm still left with a number of books to choose from after winnowing them down in the previous two steps). If the editor/publisher have good reputations I'm more likely to buy. If I know an anthology is by an editor who will really cares about the stories, about presentation and readability, I'm more likely to buy.

If I'm still left with too many books to choose from then I might start to get really superficial and resort to deciding based on cover art and/or internal illustrations. I'm a graphic designer and illustrator - it is not unusual for me to buy a book based solely on the cover. In fact, I bought "Outcast" because I love Brian Smith's illos!

So yes, as a reader, some of Shane's comments definitely do apply to me and how I do my anthology buying.

As a Writer:
I don't write for any specific themes. I write whatever comes out the end of the pen. Generally, I have a story to tell and I don't give a damn if it has a genre or a theme or whether it will fit some market or other. I just write the story that I have to tell.

When the story is finished, I try and find a market for it. I don't think many of my longer stories are very conventional, and thus they can be hard to place. If a story fits a 'Themed Anthology' great! If not, will it fit a more general anthology market such as Agog or Shadow Plays or Macabre?

If it doesn't fit any of the anthologies I'll try ASIM, Aurealis or Dark Animus.

So, as a writer... the more anthologies there are out there the better it is for me. Sure, I'd rather submit to something that has some great names already committed to it - being in auguste company is one of the joys of being published - but the story will go to where it is most likely to find a home regardless of much else. If the story doesn't fit the submission guidelines it doesn't matter one little bit who's in it, or who's editing it... well, it does, we all try to avoid the dodgy markets but I don't think any Australian small press could be classed that way at this point in time. All we have is a lot of quality outlets for Australian Spec Fic writers and that can only be an excellent thing for introducing and nurturing new talent.

Conclusion:
I guess I'm just saying that, if we all separate our 'Reader' and 'Writer' hats, we will probably get a much more objective view of what Shane seems to have been trying to say.

From a purely commercial point of view he's right! But do Small Presses in Australia expect to make a fortune from publishing an anthology? I doubt it. Nobody in their right mind would do this for commercial gain - 'commercial loss' is the norm in the industry - but we all do it anyway.

For readers on limited budgets, he's right! We have to choose somehow and all the things he mentions generally come into the equation.

But for writers, the quality and committment to small press anthologies in Australia is a great thing. I don't care how many there are. Bring 'em on! The more markets there are to submit to, the more chance I have of getting my stories in front of some sympathetic reader. As a writer, that's all I want.

No comments: