Monthly Archives: June 2016

Jun 29

I aim for submissions, which I can control, not rejections or acceptances, which I can’t (directly) control.

Posted on by

I aim for submissions, which I can control, not rejections or acceptances, which I can’t (directly) control. But the principle is sound.

(My figures so far this year: 41 submissions, 2 acceptances, 21 form rejections, 8 personalised rejections. Since the beginning of 2014: 137 submissions, 11 acceptances, 105 rejections.)

Perseverance is the key.

http://lithub.com/why-you-should-aim-for-100-rejections-a-year/

Jun 28

So, what would change if we took an evidence-based approach to crime and treated crime (and violence) as public…

Posted on by

So, what would change if we took an evidence-based approach to crime and treated crime (and violence) as public health issues?

(An evidence-based approach to education would also be nice.)

Another question, though: how do you keep politics from interfering with the implementation of actually effective approaches? Evidence is not exactly enjoying a heyday at the moment as a way of deciding what gets implemented politically.

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/06/evidence-based-criminal-justice-reform/488984/?utm_source=atlfb

Jun 28

tl;dr: Managers will get in trouble for approving something that fails, but not for rejecting something which, if…

Posted on by

tl;dr: Managers will get in trouble for approving something that fails, but not for rejecting something which, if they’d approved it, would have succeeded.

Also, peers are much better at evaluating your work than you are (you think it’s better than it is) or than your manager is (he or she is looking for the flaws in it).

Could we apply that to publishing? If so, other writers are going to be better than you, and better than publishers, at evaluating whether your book is likely to succeed.

http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2016/06/adam-grant-aspen/489056/
Jun 28

Now there’s science to back up my contention in The Well-Presented Manuscript that writing more slowly may improve…

Posted on by

Now there’s science to back up my contention in The Well-Presented Manuscript that writing more slowly may improve your work’s quality. (Pity about the clickbaity headline.)

http://www.spring.org.uk/2016/02/improve-writing-quality-with-one-easy-psychological-trick.php

Jun 27

One of the things that makes for good SFF is the ability to pull back from the unspoken assumptions of our own times.

Posted on by

One of the things that makes for good SFF is the ability to pull back from the unspoken assumptions of our own times. Robert Sheckley did this in the 1950s, criticizing consumerist suburban techno-optimism through his satirical stories.

But we can’t begin that project until we know what those assumptions are, and speak the unspeakable.

Originally shared by Brand Gamblin

Well, crap. Basically, our whole merit-based system, by being widespread and encouraging competition, is causing inequality and suffering.

Something to think next time you’re “gamify”ing a process.

The good news is, there is a cure! Gamify the process where you are the only competitor.

In other words, compare yourself only to your past, and work to beat your previous best. You are constantly trying to improve, while leaving room to be kind and forgiving to others.

https://shift.newco.co/the-idea-thats-killing-mission-driven-companies-23ed12cbc878#.q2zx1bffm

Jun 26

The middle of the year (by count of days) is this coming weekend.

Posted on by

The middle of the year (by count of days) is this coming weekend.

I wonder if I can get four more short story submissions sent off before then? Because that would bring me equal to my total number of submissions for the whole of 2014.

Counting like that is a silly thing, but it helps to keep me motivated.

(I’ve also had fewer rejections, and twice as many sales. But since that’s two sales rather than one, you can see why I need to keep up my motivation somehow.)