Michelle E. Goldsmith's Blog

It probably goes without saying that as a judge for the collection and anthology categories of the 2016 Aurealis Awards, I read a lot of speculative fiction anthologies and collections.

Now, this in itself isn’t too unusual for me, as I’m a big fan of short fiction. However, being a judge required me to read everything and anything entered into the category, regardless of my own preferences for subgenre and all the other little predilections and biases that inevitably figure into my usual reading selections. I also had to justify my assessment of each book to the other judges, which caused me to really interrogate why something either worked or didn’t work for me.

By necessity, I was also judging books not only for their individual merits and impact on me as a reader, but evaluating them against one another – we had to choose a shortlist and winner, after all.

On top of this, a last-minute submission flood also meant that I had to read a lot of these recently published, Australian-written or edited books one after the other over a relatively short amount of time.

Under these conditions, previously vague theories I’d had about all things anthologies and collections precipitated into much clearer and more definite ideas. Not too far into the judging, I couldn’t help but notice various trends in the books submitted, as well as similarities and differences between the entries that really stood out above the rest, and those that really didn’t.

With this in mind, I decided I’d throw together some of my thoughts about judging, and what I learned about what makes a standout anthology or collection (as well as some common issues to avoid).

Now… on to the juicy stuff!

Snarky editor warning!

Keep in mind, sections of this post were written by grumpy, caffeine-deprived Editor Michelle (as opposed to more sympathetic Author Michelle who knows writing is hard at the best of times). Editor Michelle tends not to mince words, gets paid for being extremely critical in telling people what’s wrong with their writing, and still hasn’t forgiven you for that misleading opening sentence and not knowing the difference between ‘sewage’ and ‘sewerage’. Some writers are scared of her.

A great anthology or collection works as more than the sum of its parts

 

If there was one thing that really distinguished the top-tier books from those that were merely good, it was that each of the best works provided a whole that was greater than the sum of its parts.

There are plenty of anthologies and collections that package good stories together. But if this is all a book does, then it really isn’t enough to stand out. In contrast, the very best collections or anthologies seem to elevate themselves by giving the reader something extra, something they wouldn’t get if they’d read each story individually.

This ‘something extra’ might be little links between stories that provide additional insights, or it might involve building upon central themes throughout the book, or exploring ideas from different angles in different stories – it could be any number of things. It just has to be there.

Some of the best collections or anthologies submitted for the Aurealis Awards last year contained stories I’d previously read elsewhere. However, even though I very rarely reread books or stories for leisure, I had no problem reading these stories again because they offered a different, richer experience in context with the other stories in the collection or anthology. I think that’s quite telling.

When the equation comes out negative

 

Unfortunately, collecting stories together can also have the opposite effect to what I described above, resulting in something lesser than the sum of its parts.

In some cases, being presented in the context of a collection or anthology can actually prove detrimental to individual stories, diffusing their impact and significance.

This can happen, for instance, in a single-authored collection if the author often writes on similar themes, with a similar style, tone and aesthetic, and often includes certain types of characters. Collecting such similar stories together means that they can feel a bit samey when read one after the other, resulting in a book that feels monotonous. Additionally, any weaker stories will stand out more to the reader because they’ve just read the same author do pretty much the same thing more effectively.

Similar problems can occur with anthologies that are relatively tightly themed, or where the editor has very distinctive taste. During judging, I read some stories in anthologies or collections that I would have enjoyed much more had I encountered them in a different, more varied context.

 

Story order matters

 

The order of stories is vital to the flow of an anthology or collection. Placing stories with just enough (but not too much) similarity in theme, tone, or style close to one another can create a cohesiveness that makes the book engaging to read. However, it is often a bad idea to put stories using overly similar tropes or plots in close sequence.

In some submitted anthologies, for example, stories seemed to have been ordered simply by grouping them into distinct and overly obvious categories. For the reader, the effects of such unimaginative organisation can range from the mildly annoying, to the borderline excruciating. By the time they’re reading the third story in a row featuring a graphic rape scene, for instance, many readers might find it’s getting a bit too much.

(It’s worth acknowledging that this may vary with reader expectations – if I was reading an anthology of stories about overcoming trauma or abuse I’d probably be braced for some pretty full-on content and my response might be different).

Conversely, throwing stories into an anthology or collection in a seemingly random order also seldom works and can be very jarring. Haphazard ordering often impedes the flow, can disorientate the reader, and may disrupt the development of any thematic resonance or other effects that might otherwise be achieved throughout the anthology or collection.

 

Production values and the (too often neglected) art of editing and proofing

 

Now, I don’t mean to be one of those people who constantly complains about declining editorial standards and whatever else, but production values really did prove to be a stumbling block for too many Aurealis Award entries.

In addition to errors in editing and proofing, problems with layout, design and (where applicable) typesetting and digital formatting were all too common. To be blunt, some of the books we received just weren’t up to scratch in the production department.

I can only guess at what might have happened behind the scenes, but some of the submissions appeared to have only been given one quick editorial pass. As most authors and publishers should be aware, proofing and editing (including developmental editing, structural editing, copyediting, and anything between) are not the same thing, and you do need both to deliver the best possible book to the reader.

Some submissions showed symptoms I usually associate with skipping editorial steps, or attempting to proof and edit stories at the same time. Even some books that were otherwise well-written had too many instances of missing full stops, typos, misplaced possessive apostrophes, inconsistent spelling and more.

This is a real shame. Kind of like cooking a lavish meal and then just chucking a handful of sawdust on as garnish, forcing the person eating it to pick through everything to get to the good stuff. (Yeah, cooking knowledge isn’t my strong point – I should have got someone who knows about cooking to edit this.)

Ideally, for the best results, the proofer should be fresh to the book. The person who edits the book should not be the same person who proofs it. The editor or proofer should definitely not be the author. Everyone makes mistakes and it’s always going to be much more difficult to proof your own writing. Some publishers I’ve done freelance proofing or other work for actually use two different professional proofers (after editing) before anything goes to print.

Now, I understand that the types of non-fiction publications I work on in my day job have much larger budgets than most spec fic books (often with production costs well within the five-figure range) and that shelling out thousands for top-notch editors and multiple proofers is probably unrealistic for even some of the larger spec fic imprints. It may actually be financially impossible for most small presses or indie authors.

I also know that as a professional editor and proofer, I’m pickier than most readers. However, there’s only so much accommodation that can be made for smaller budgets. When it gets to the point that excessive typos and inconsistencies are really impeding the flow of the writing and jerking readers out of the stories, it becomes a problem that needs to be addressed.

Authors and publishers need to keep in mind that their work will be competing (in both awards and the market) against books that have been gone over by at least one professional editor and proofer. At the very least, even small presses and indie authors should get someone to check over the things that really stand out, like story titles and running heads.

And don’t get me started on ebook formatting. Digital books shouldn’t be physically painful to read.

A niggling suspicion about the power of a name

 

This one may be primarily a matter of personal taste, but I often find that the stories I consider the weakest in a given anthology turn out to be written by the most well-known authors.

This is something I’ve noticed for years. Not particularly an Aurealis thing.

If I don’t look at the names on the stories before reading them, as I sometimes do in an attempt to limit bias, most of the time when I find a story that has me perplexed about how it made the cut, it turns out to be written by a ‘big name’. Often it’s also someone who’s better known for novels, but that could be because authors who primarily write short fiction rarely become ‘big names’.

Could it be that well-known authors are sometimes given a bit more leeway with the quality of their stories? While this would make perfect sense on a ‘how to sell more books’ level – after all, the popular authors bring in readers – it still bothers me from the perspective of editorial ethics and quality control.

If an author invited to an anthology lacks the time or inspiration to write to a particular prompt, then perhaps they should decline the invite, or maybe the editor should be a bit braver and reject a story or tell that superstar author they need to do some revising or accept a heavier edit.

I guess it’s a matter of striking a balance between market and artistic considerations, and I’d be interested to see if anyone else has noticed this.

 

Resonance – hard to pinpoint, but vitally important

 

Another thing I noticed when judging was that if a book or story really works for me, I’ll remember it without needing any prompting. If not, it will quickly dissolve into the amorphous mass of stories that I don’t particularly care about. That sounds harsh, but a lot of it comes down to one question:

Will I remember this story in a day, a week, a year?

Even if a story is not to my personal taste, it can still be memorable and powerful. And to clarify, I don’t mean ‘memorable’ in a cheap shock ‘Well that’s burned into my brain and now I need a shower and a stiff drink’ kind of way.

There are a lot of competently written stories and books that simply lack an additional spark or some element of passion to make them resonate. And when it comes to award judging, few judges are going to argue for the shortlisting of a book that is just ‘well done’. It needs to stand out and it needs to get readers passionate about it, it needs to make them feel something.

I guess that’s a question that comes up a lot in fiction. Why should I care about these characters or situations? I need a reason to care. And I need to care for the story to affect me as a reader. Make me feel something. Anything!

(I am cold and dead inside please send help…)

Final thoughts

 

All in all, despite my griping, the experience of judging the Aurealis Awards has been overwhelming positive (despite a noticeable lack of bribery attempts) and reaffirmed to me that there are many talented writers of spec fic in Australia. I’d encourage other speculative fiction writers and readers to give judging a go if they can. But keep in mind that, depending on the number of entries in a category, it can be very time-consuming. There’s a reason I chose to do it during a year off study before starting my PhD.

I can honestly say that I’m very confident that our winners and shortlists in the anthology and collection categories this year are deserving. I’m also confident that I did my best to be a good and fair judge of all the entries that were submitted.

Do you agree with my musings? Or do you think I’ve missed the mark? Is there anything else you think is vital for great collections or anthologies? Feel free to let me know in the comments.

2016 Aurealis Award Shortlists

 

The complete 2016 shortlists for all award categories can be viewed on the Aurealis Awards website.

 

Best Collection:

Crow Shine, Alan Baxter (Ticonderoga Publications)

Concentration, Jack Dann (PS Publishing)

A Feast of Sorrows, Angela Slatter (Prime)

Winter Children, Angela Slatter (PS Publishing)

 

Best Anthology:

Dreaming in the Dark, Jack Dann (ed.) (PS Publishing Australia)

Defying Doomsday, Tsana Dolichva and Holly Kench (eds.) (Twelfth Planet Press)

Year’s Best YA Speculative Fiction 2015, Julia Rios and Alisa Krasnostein (eds.) (Twelfth Planet Press)

Best Science Fiction and Fantasy of the Year: Volume 10, Jonathan Strahan (ed.) (Solaris)

In Your Face, Tehani Wessely (ed.) (Fablecroft Publishing)

 

The post Notes from an Aurealis Judge – Collections and Anthologies appeared first on Michelle E Goldsmith.

My short story Love Story, an Exorcism is out now in the inaugural issue of Gamut.

It’s probably my most confronting piece of fiction published to date, and one of the most experimental (but perhaps also one of the most powerful). I fully expect some people will hate it. And that’s ok. All I hope is that it resonates with a few readers.

Writing this story was a case where the story kind of just flowed out onto the page with relatively little effort once I started. I’m generally an outliner and heavy reviser, so that’s pretty rare for me. Now it’s out there and can stop haunting me (or perhaps just diffuse the haunting across a few other people, as the case may be).

The editing process with Richard Thomas was really professional and pain-free, and I think Luke Spooner’s art really adds something special to the piece.

So if the story sounds like your kind of thing (you messed up individual), I’d love if you’d read it!

You can view it online as a member or buy an ebook or subscription.

If you’re a genre fan and haven’t subscribed to Gamut yet, it’s well worth checking out! Mine is the first new story up but there are some great reprint stories online in the sample, as well as poetry and non-fiction, and the lineup of authors to come looks fantastic.

Hope you have a happy new year and may 2017 not kick you in the face too frequently!

So far, lined up for the year I have some surgery to treat my chronic condition (actually I’m taking part in a surgical trial) and beginning a PhD, which will involve publishing research and hopefully result in the creation of my first full-length book – a linked story collection of weird/interstitial fiction.

Art by Luke Spooner

The post Love Story, an Exorcism at Gamut appeared first on Michelle E Goldsmith.

My Aurealis-shortlisted short story, The Jellyfish Collector, can now be found at PodCastle in both audio and text versions.

The story is featured as part of PodCastle’s Aurealis Month, which aims to highlight Australian speculative fiction by showcasing stories nominated for the Aurealis Award.

The podcast episode is hosted by Aidan Doyle and narrated by Dawn Meredith.

The Jellyfish Collector was originally published in Review of Australian Fiction in 2015, and was shortlisted for the ‘Best Fantasy Short Story’ Aurealis category.

The full list of Aurealis Month consists of:

PodCastle 440: The Jellyfish Collector 

PodCastle 441: A Shot Of Salt Water  by Lisa L. Hannett, read by Cian Mac Mahon, hosted by Angela Slatter

PodCastle 442: Almost Days  by D.K. Mok, read by Graeme Dunlop, hosted by Margo Lanagan

PodCastle 443: Blueblood by Faith Mudge, read by Loulou Szal, hosted by Cat Sparks

PodCastle 444: The Giant’s Lady  by Rowena Cory Daniells, read by Barry Haworth, hosted by Graeme Dunlop

PodCastle Miniature 93: Husk And Sheaf by Suzanne J. Willis, read by Graeme Dunlop, hosted by Aidan Doyle

The post The Jellyfish Collector published at PodCastle appeared first on Michelle E Goldsmith.

Welcome to Orphancorp by Marlee Jane Ward

This month I’m recommending Welcome to Orphancorp by Marlee Jane Ward.

This razor sharp near future SF novella tells the story of Mirii, an orphan who’s nearing her last days in a privatised orphanage before she ages out of the system.

While the book unflinchingly explores concepts of class, the corporatisation of various institutions, dehumanisation and the abuse of detained youth, the brutality of the events portrayed is counterbalanced with ample humour, humanity and moments of triumph against adversity.

Overall, it’s a great read with an engaging voice and a corporate dystopia that feels disturbingly real and relevant in today’s world.

This novella won both the 2015 Seizure Viva La Novella Prize and the 2016 Victorian Premier’s Literary Award for Young Adult. Read it to see why!

More about the book can be found on the publisher’s site.

The post Book rec of the month – September 2016 appeared first on Michelle E Goldsmith.

I’ve been interviewed as part of the 2016 Aussie SF Snapshot!

I talk to Helen Stubbs about upcoming publications, working on my science fiction novel and next short stories, my writing process and development as a writer, Australian works I’ve recently enjoyed and authors I’d like to meet.

Personally, when I compare this interview to my 2014 interview (the first Snapshot I participated in) it highlights to me that despite various setbacks, over the past couple of years I’ve actually achieved some goals I didn’t expect to meet just yet and made decent progress with my writing. I think it provides some useful perspective when it’s so easy as a writer to feel like you’re getting nowhere and focus on the things you haven’t yet done.

The Australian Spec Fic Snapshot is a biannual project to interview as many people involved in the Australian speculative fiction scene as possible to provide an overview of the field. I always enjoy finding out what everyone is up to and the interviews provide some interesting reading.

If you’re interested in Aussie spec fic, you should definitely check out the other interviews on the Snapshot site. It also hosts archives of past Snapshots.

Header image: Milky Way over Guilderton Lighthouse, Western Australia by inefekt69. Licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 2.0.

The post Australian SF Snapshot 2016 Interview appeared first on Michelle E Goldsmith.

I’m not sure I quite believe it yet, but I sold a story to Gamut, a forthcoming online magazine that will feature genre fiction on the literary end of the spectrum.

My story is called Love Story; An Exorcism. It’s a (potentially rather harrowing) tale about an abusive friendship between two children, told in the second person.

One of my beta readers described it as ‘beautiful but painful to read’. It’s the type of story that probably won’t be for everyone (due to the style and subject matter) but seems to really resonate with some readers.

The story originally started as a bit of an experiment for me to challenge myself as a writer, but it seems to have worked out quite nicely.  (Apparently mine was the very first unsolicited story they accepted, too).

It’s also my first pro-paying sale of original fiction!

Gamut‘s Editor-in-Chief is Richard Thomas and the Gamut team features a range of talented editors, writers, artists and designers. The site will officially launch in January 2017.

In the meantime, you could check out some of the articles and stories available as a free sample on the Gamut website for a taste of what’s to come.

 

Images by Luke Spooner (Staff Illustrator for Gamut).

The post Story sale to Gamut appeared first on Michelle E Goldsmith.

I’m excited to announce that I’ve signed a contract with PodCastle for an audio version of The Jellyfish Collector, originally published in Review of Australian Fiction.

The story is scheduled for November this year and will be released as part of a PodCastle feature on Aurealis Award-shortlisted fiction. This is the first foray into audio for my fiction and I’m really excited that this story will now have the opportunity to reach a wider audience.

I’m sure PodCastle will do a great job and hopefully their listeners enjoy the story! I will definitely let people know when it’s released.

 

Header image: Jellyfish by Stephan Dobberkau (licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivs 2.0)

The post Reprint sale to PodCastle appeared first on Michelle E Goldsmith.

Leena Krohn: Collected Fiction

This month I’d like to recommend Leena Krohn: Collected Fiction, which collects a number of novels, novel extracts and short stories from the iconic Finnish writer and is published by Cheeky Frawg Books.

This hefty tome really showcases the breadth of Krohn’s fiction and the works included range from the surreal, to the more classically science fictional. I think it would be hard to read this book and come away unaffected. To me, the fiction has a rare permeating quality,  and I’m sure I’ll carry particular images, turns of phrase and themes from it with me for a long time yet.

Some of my personal favourites included Tainaron: Mail from Another City (translated by Hildi Hawkins), Pereat Mundus: A Novel of Sorts (translated by Hildi Hawkins) and Datura, or A Figment Seen By Everyone (translated by Anna Volmari & J. Robert Tupasela).

More about the book can be found on the publisher’s site.

Header photo by Laura Böök.

The post Book rec of the month – August 2016 appeared first on Michelle E Goldsmith.

It’s time for another monthly book recommendation. This month I’m going for another interesting book that I’m glad I read. Enjoy!

Only the Animals by Ceridwen Dovey

This month I’m recommending Only the Animals by Ceridwen Dovey.

This collection consists of ten stories narrated by the souls of animals who died during human conflicts across history. While the subject matter means the book could be terribly depressing, the stories retain a sense of off-beat humour that prevents the collection from being too bleak.

Overall, it’s a thoughtful and interesting read.

More about the book can be found on the publisher’s site.

About the author:

Ceridwen Dovey was born in South Africa and raised between South Africa and Australia. She studied social anthropology at Harvard as an undergraduate and received her Masters in social anthropology from New York University. Her debut novel, Blood Kin, was published in fifteen countries, shortlisted for the Dylan Thomas Prize, and selected for the US National Book Foundation’s prestigious ‘5 Under 35’ honours list. The Wall Street Journal has named her as one of their ‘artists to watch.’ Her second book of fiction, Only the Animals, was described by The Guardian as a ‘dazzling, imagined history of humans’ relationship with animals.’ Ceridwen lives in Sydney.

Header image: Black Bear by Jitze Couperus.

The post Book rec of the month – July 2016 appeared first on Michelle E Goldsmith.

This weekend I’m heading to Continuum 12, Melbourne’s annual fan run speculative fiction convention.

I’m looking forward to catching up with old friends and meeting new ones. I’m also on five panels this year on a range of interesting topics.

 

My panels:

 

High Gothic (Friday 10th June, 5pm)

Panellists: Jane Routley, Stephanie Lai, Michelle Goldsmith

Is it making a comeback? Why now? What’s it all about anyway?

 

Writers and Doubt (Saturday 11th June, 4pm)

Panellists: Aidan Doyle, Michelle Goldsmith, Steve Cameron, Tracy Joyce, Robert New

Dealing with Imposter Syndrome. A very real and quite sobering issue, join us for a discussion on how to deal with Imposter Syndrome and what we can do to alleviate it.

 

Interstitial Fiction (Sunday 12th June, 10am)

Panellists: Michelle Goldsmith, Laura E. Goodin, Laura Wilkinson

What is it? Is it old or new? Is it the most popular genre you’ve never heard of?

 

Horror Stories (Sunday 12th June, 4pm)

Panellists: Julia Svaganovic, Steve Dillon, Talie Helene, Michelle Goldsmith

Why do we love being scared? Which type of fear works best? Should it have a message or can it just be horror for its own sake?

 

The Author is a Jerk! (Monday 13th June, 1pm)

Panellists: David McDonald, Jane Routley, Laura E. Goodin, Steve Cameron, Michelle Goldsmith

How do the personal opinions and actions of an author affect the reception of their work and do we really care? Should an author’s personal and professional lives remain separate or should we boycott problematic authors?

 

So if you’re in Melbourne this weekend consider dropping by. Friday night has gold coin donation entry, so you can join the fun on a budget.

 

About Continuum:

Continuum is an annual fan run speculative fiction and pop culture convention. From science-fiction to epic fantasy and everything in between, Continuum 12 will celebrate the theme “Stranger Than Fiction”. Continuum runs every year on the Queen’s Birthday long weekend. In 2016 the convention will be held between June 10-13 at the Hotel Jasper in Melbourne’s CBD.

Run by fans for fans, Continuum features a great line up of writers and artists at the Hotel Jasper in Melbourne. The guests of honor at the convention will be Queenie Chan and Kylie Chan.

The post Where I’ll be at Continuum 12 appeared first on Michelle E Goldsmith.