On Being Pro
May 11, 2000
8:02 a.m.
Thanks to all you well-wishers out there. The birthday was great, as always. Brigid and Lisa showered me with lot's of great stuff. Cards, a collection of Calvin and Hobbes books (Brigid is really into them these days), and last but not least ... my latest toy ... a handheld Visor. Yes, Lisa (the friend/writer, not the wife/copyeditor), when next we meet, we'll be able to beam over our business cards and all that good stuff. So, I went to work yesterday, and in the middle of a meeting I whipped it out and took notes. Very cool. People ooh end ahhed appropriately. "So, is that just a toy or is it a real productivity enhancer?" one guy asked. "I would have to say it's really a productivity enhancer," I replied immediately. "Heck, I've been working to set it up for the past twelve hours alone!"   So, let's talk a little bit more on professional vs. non-professional. It's a topic that never fails to bring a rise out of people, and it's one that's on my mind again. What is professional? I hear and see new writers asking this all the time. And when they're asking it, it's usually with an excited lilt to their voice as they charge forward to defend the latest small press magazine that published their material. If it's on the Net, you can almost see the rosy flush to their cheeks and the wideness of their eyes as they challenge you to knock the little battery off their shoulder (okay, I hope that allusion wasn't too ancient for some of you!) The irony here is that they have the right question. Professional is about money. Yes. But there's professional and there's professional. The reason I'm thinking this is that I've run into another example that I'll share, withholding the names of the "guilty" in order to keep from creating issues where they won't be valuable. This past Sunday morning, I sent five e-mail queries to five magazines that have been holding stories of mine for longer than they usually do ... two of them actually over a year. Yeah, I know. Shame on me. But you know, I've always taken the mindset of "keep it as long as you need, I'll make more." Anyway. Maybe tomorrow can be on marketing strategies. Today is about something else, and I'm just getting myself sidetracked. Anyway, just to set the scene farther, I never e-mail a place that doesn't post its e-mail address, and specifically sayi it's okay (or even preferable) to e-mail. Yes, I'm a wired person, and I like e-mail best of all. But I'm also professional, and if a business doesn't suggest e-mail as being ok, I generally assume they want snail. But these places all said e-mail was fine, so that's the format I used. It's now Thursday morning, a full four days after the e-mailing. I've received a grand total of 1 reply. Kim Mohan of Amazing fame came back to me on Monday, and explained where my story was, and went further to let me know a bit of his situation and why he was running late. Very prompt, very professional. The rest, you ask? Well. They're all small press. I've heard nothing from them. "But those editors all have day jobs!" you say. Well, as you know if you follow the field, Kim Mohan spend most of his time on another post with WotC, and does amazing in what cracks of time are left over. There's so much that's interesting here. There are so many things about this that help define, not only what professional and non-professional are, but also defines why new writers are new writers. Things like the fact that it was Kim Mohan that recently suffered what was surely a barrage of abuse when he announced he didn't want to see manuscripts from people who didn't have credentials. He stated at the time that he was highly inventoried, and was unlikely to buy much, and that only people with credentials should apply. In the business world, this type of statement seems pretty much straightforward and useful. It says, "if you're looking for a job, don't waste your time here right now." At the time, he also said he would change that policy when he could. Think about that from the business point of view. Was his behavior professional? I think so. Certainly more professional than buying more stories than you plan to use, or buying stories and sitting on them for years, or sitting on a submittal for way, way long. Money is the easy measure, but there are other things that make a professional. Kim is also the one editor that has always taken the time to respond with some level of critique to every story I've ever submitted--and I don't think I'm unique. I don't always agree with what he says. But he provides it, and I think about it -- which is exactly what a professional relationship between editor and writer is supposed to be. So, what's your point, Ron? My point is that we as writers need to find our way through the markets as best as we can, but we need to do it in a positive way, a way that results in building the field, and in building our selves. I'll work, for example, with Rob Stephenson at Altair again without a second thought (despite his recent rate problems) because Rob's been straightforward and prompt with me, and because he puts out a really nice product. The Swenson's Talebones is another example based on my limited contact. And there are more. But I won't come to the defense of the small press in general as a professional collection. Professional is as professional does. We owe it to ourselves to be cognizant of it, and to hold ourselves accountable to behave in accordance with it.  Daily Persistence: Like watching "Spinal Tap" Daily Persistence is © Ron Collins |
|
Fiddling with software ... the never ending story |
BACK TO 
|