Why I read who I read

I like to think that I read a lot, but really, I only get through about 200 short stories a year (at most, some years it’s more like 80) and about 150 novels.* This means I need to be selective in my reading.

There are some writers of reasonable renown who have selected themselves out of my reading,** and there is a tendency among quite a few emerging writers to join their ranks.

I have lists of authors I watch out for. They won’t be invited into my anthologies, and they will have to produce a near-perfect manuscript for me to accept something from them. I won’t beta read for them anymore, because they’re not learning from what I say and so they’re wasting my time: they don’t have to do what I suggest if they ask for my input, but they do have to improve their work following the beta read. Worst of all, I don’t race out to read their work when I see it in print.

All these things fall out of one simple reason – I’ve seen too much material from them that is half-baked. If someone asks me privately for an opinion of their work, then the answer I give could be “A bunch of talent, but dead lazy,” or “Needs lots of editing,” or “Doesn’t world build credibly,” or “Gets basic understandings wrong and grossly insults their readership,” or “Wrong market,” or “They’re writing the way most other people do – the story is very trendy, but derivative and will date” – and other things. The underlying reason is, however, that they're playing with me in not giving me consistently good reading.

I have other lists of authors I watch out for. I read every word, avidly. I will buy a magazine because their name is in it. I will want them in my books (see the table of contents of Baggage – all those writers were invited). I will be happy to beta read even when I’m busy (and have done so, twice this week) and I don’t care if they’re famous, infamous or completely unknown. All I know is that I love their writing.

Sometimes they send me a less-than-good piece to look at, and when they do, I’m afraid I scold them. I tell them about punctuation and run-on sentences and poverty of the built world and I say “This isn’t your best work.” Each and every one of them then picks up and turns the not-so-good into something worth reading. And none of them sends me anything less than interesting twice. They show me that they appreciate me as a reader through the way they treat me as a beta reader and as an editor. This is crucial. All editors are readers first. So I can, as a reader, trust them and hunt out their work. I can tell people “Read so-and-so” because even their worst writing will be worth the time.

It’s not how many times one submits a story, it’s who one submits that story to. It’s not how many words we write, it’s how well we write those words. It’s not all about the splash of entry into the writing world, it’s about maintaining a reputation as a good writer so that readers will seek us out over and over again.

I’ve been thinking as an editor this week, for a number of reasons, but the place I’m in right now reminds me always, that the editor is first and foremost a reader. If writers don’t see this, then they’re wasting an editor’s time. It may cost them sales or reputation. It will certainly cost them the grail of finding more and more readers who must read our work, who can’t live a day without buying our latest, and who read all night because the story gives them no way out until it’s finished.




* For those keeping track of the numbers, everything else is non-fiction.
**If I’ve said nice things about you here, you are not in that number. There are lots of writers about whom I haven’t said nice things who are also not in that number. I trust and even love the work of many writers. I'm just annoyed right now at other writers. I want to love their work. I truly do. And I want to support them. And I find it becomes harder and harder and I look more and more like someone born to be mean.