What do you think?
Rate this book
Made in L.A. Vol. 5: Vantage Points
Made in L.A. Vol. 5: Vantage Points shows Los Angeles through local authors' unique perspectives.
In Los Angeles, the only constant is change. Our lives go through cycles and rotations. We incorporate new ideas, people, workplaces, and patterns as we create the futures we have dreamed of since childhood. And so, the stories we tell are malleable and shifting, too. We seek out places to survey the world around us, to understand where we’ve come from, where we are, and where we’re going. In a sprawling, intricately patterned landscape shaped by the lives of millions, we find commonalities and differences, joy and sorrow, and moments of convergence.
In this anthology, the fifth Made in L.A. short-fiction collection, stories are told through lenses that focus on the aptitude of Angelenos to reinvent and reimagine, to take action for ourselves and for others. Angeleno storytellers understand that to seek truth in a continually shifting and evolving world requires constant readjustment of the prism through which we perceive modern society. To solve the failures and dilemmas of the past, present, and future, we must observe from every conceivable angle and vantage point.
In Los Angeles, the only constant is change. Our lives go through cycles and rotations. We incorporate new ideas, people, workplaces, and patterns as we create the futures we have dreamed of since childhood. And so, the stories we tell are malleable and shifting, too. We seek out places to survey the world around us, to understand where we’ve come from, where we are, and where we’re going. In a sprawling, intricately patterned landscape shaped by the lives of millions, we find commonalities and differences, joy and sorrow, and moments of convergence.
In this anthology, the fifth Made in L.A. short-fiction collection, stories are told through lenses that focus on the aptitude of Angelenos to reinvent and reimagine, to take action for ourselves and for others. Angeleno storytellers understand that to seek truth in a continually shifting and evolving world requires constant readjustment of the prism through which we perceive modern society. To solve the failures and dilemmas of the past, present, and future, we must observe from every conceivable angle and vantage point.
248 pages, Paperback
Published June 1, 2023
1 person is currently reading
4 people want to read
About the author
Cody Sisco
10 books61 followersCody Sisco is an author, editor, publisher, and literary community organizer. His LGBT psychological science fiction series includes two novels thus far, Broken Mirror and Tortured Echoes. He is a freelance editor specializing in genre-bending fiction and the acquisitions editor for RIZE Press. In 2017, he co-founded Made in L.A. Writers, an indie author co-op dedicated to the support and appreciation of independent authors. His startup, BookSwell, is a literary events and media production company dedicated to lifting up marginalized voices and connecting readers and writers in Southern California and beyond. He serves as a Co-Executive on the Board of Governors for the Editorial Freelancers Association and as a board member at APLA Health.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews
September 21, 2025
Made in L.A., Volume 5: Vantage Points is an anthology of short fiction that takes place in L.A. and that was written by writers who live in or have some association with L.A. It's short fiction; it's from my hometown--er, home region--in order words, I should love it.
I do not love it.
There's no apparent or stated age restriction for submission, e.g., writers under 30 (or under 40!), but based on the writers' bios, it seems like most of the writers are young, or at least new(ish) to writing. I hate to be the writing teacher here, but the writers' lack of experience (and success as actual published writers) is glaring. As is typical with most young writers, many of these stories aren't actually stories. Rather, they are a-day-in-the-life-of vignettes. Vignettes are fine as writing tools, and some of the characterization is quite good, but they're not substitutes for stories. Again, I'm going to sound like the failed writer and former writing instructor that I am: Short stories must have beginnings, middles, and ends. I can look past a bad beginning, but the the middle and the end and especially their juxtapositions is where most of the short-fiction action is. Almost all of these stories have endings, but not all of them actually end, as in the ending sheds no new light on the plot.
Oh, right, plots, remember those? Tension, rising action, etc.? Well, apparently, most of these writers forgot about only the most important part of fiction--especially short fiction--or maybe they're trying to revolutionize writing by heroically ignoring plot, or maybe my notions of what makes writing good are oppressive remnants of colonial, White, cis, hetero normativity. You may think I'm going overboard; but just read some of the editors' presumptuous, frankly unironically pretentious bios if you don't believe that the point of this series is to promote writing that the general public wouldn't normally read.
I'm all for that. I really am. But if the reason we're not reading it is that the writing itself is bad, then it doesn't matter what marginalized background the writers come from. If anything, reading bad writing by supposedly marginalized writers feels like tokenism at best. At its worst, it can lead to an anti-diversity backlash like we're seeing in American politics at the moment. I'm all for supporting and holding up marginalized voices. But those voices have to be meaningful. Bad writing is bad writing, no matter who writes it. I won't be reading more books in this series, because I just don't trust the editors' ability to distinguish good writing from bad.
Am I being too harsh? About 40 percent of the stories in this anthology are interesting, but none are great or even near great. The vast majority of stories are nowhere near finished; they read like very early (third or fourth) drafts. Some may be parts of future collections of stories or chapters in novels, but as standalone works of fiction, most don't past muster. I do enjoy the audacity of some of the writers' approaches, but beyond that, there's very little to recommend.
Almost every single story mentions the 405 Freeway, whether or not that traffic-congested cliché is relevant to the story or its setting. Usually, it is not. (In one story, the 405 is mentioned, but the setting of the story is nowhere near that particular freeway.) Almost all of the stories take place in Hollywood, the San Fernando Valley, or on the West Side. You want to talk about marginalization? Yes, there's racial, class, sexuality, and gender marginalization; but there's also geographical marginalization, and while it wouldn't bother me enough normally to talk about it, I am quite annoyed that an anthology supposedly devoted to lifting up rarely heard voices would break its own rules and set almost all of its stories in the parts of L.A. and L.A. County that non-Angelenos are already quite familiar with. What about the East Side? Not just Downtown and Boyle Heights and East L.A., but the inner-ring and eastern suburbs? (Huntington Park, Paramount, Lynwood, etc.) You know, where the vast majority of People of Color in L.A. County live? Again, this doesn't really matter to me, but if you're going to shove a very particular kind of diversity down my throat, I'm going to point out that you're still telling largely White people's stories in exclusive neighborhoods, even if your characters aren't White. And why are the story titles so godawful? They're not just bad or boring; they're horrific. Almost all of them are too specific in very unfortunate ways. Writing instructor John here again: The titles of short stories should not read like headlines or summaries of the stories themselves.
Ryan Shoemaker's "Come as You Are" is probably the best story in the anthology. Tisha Marie Reichle-Aguilera's "Looking for Joey" is honorable mention; it's a good story, to be sure, but it holds a special place for me because one of its characters is a student at my high school, and part of it takes place there. (Go Cubs!)
I do not love it.
There's no apparent or stated age restriction for submission, e.g., writers under 30 (or under 40!), but based on the writers' bios, it seems like most of the writers are young, or at least new(ish) to writing. I hate to be the writing teacher here, but the writers' lack of experience (and success as actual published writers) is glaring. As is typical with most young writers, many of these stories aren't actually stories. Rather, they are a-day-in-the-life-of vignettes. Vignettes are fine as writing tools, and some of the characterization is quite good, but they're not substitutes for stories. Again, I'm going to sound like the failed writer and former writing instructor that I am: Short stories must have beginnings, middles, and ends. I can look past a bad beginning, but the the middle and the end and especially their juxtapositions is where most of the short-fiction action is. Almost all of these stories have endings, but not all of them actually end, as in the ending sheds no new light on the plot.
Oh, right, plots, remember those? Tension, rising action, etc.? Well, apparently, most of these writers forgot about only the most important part of fiction--especially short fiction--or maybe they're trying to revolutionize writing by heroically ignoring plot, or maybe my notions of what makes writing good are oppressive remnants of colonial, White, cis, hetero normativity. You may think I'm going overboard; but just read some of the editors' presumptuous, frankly unironically pretentious bios if you don't believe that the point of this series is to promote writing that the general public wouldn't normally read.
I'm all for that. I really am. But if the reason we're not reading it is that the writing itself is bad, then it doesn't matter what marginalized background the writers come from. If anything, reading bad writing by supposedly marginalized writers feels like tokenism at best. At its worst, it can lead to an anti-diversity backlash like we're seeing in American politics at the moment. I'm all for supporting and holding up marginalized voices. But those voices have to be meaningful. Bad writing is bad writing, no matter who writes it. I won't be reading more books in this series, because I just don't trust the editors' ability to distinguish good writing from bad.
Am I being too harsh? About 40 percent of the stories in this anthology are interesting, but none are great or even near great. The vast majority of stories are nowhere near finished; they read like very early (third or fourth) drafts. Some may be parts of future collections of stories or chapters in novels, but as standalone works of fiction, most don't past muster. I do enjoy the audacity of some of the writers' approaches, but beyond that, there's very little to recommend.
Almost every single story mentions the 405 Freeway, whether or not that traffic-congested cliché is relevant to the story or its setting. Usually, it is not. (In one story, the 405 is mentioned, but the setting of the story is nowhere near that particular freeway.) Almost all of the stories take place in Hollywood, the San Fernando Valley, or on the West Side. You want to talk about marginalization? Yes, there's racial, class, sexuality, and gender marginalization; but there's also geographical marginalization, and while it wouldn't bother me enough normally to talk about it, I am quite annoyed that an anthology supposedly devoted to lifting up rarely heard voices would break its own rules and set almost all of its stories in the parts of L.A. and L.A. County that non-Angelenos are already quite familiar with. What about the East Side? Not just Downtown and Boyle Heights and East L.A., but the inner-ring and eastern suburbs? (Huntington Park, Paramount, Lynwood, etc.) You know, where the vast majority of People of Color in L.A. County live? Again, this doesn't really matter to me, but if you're going to shove a very particular kind of diversity down my throat, I'm going to point out that you're still telling largely White people's stories in exclusive neighborhoods, even if your characters aren't White. And why are the story titles so godawful? They're not just bad or boring; they're horrific. Almost all of them are too specific in very unfortunate ways. Writing instructor John here again: The titles of short stories should not read like headlines or summaries of the stories themselves.
Ryan Shoemaker's "Come as You Are" is probably the best story in the anthology. Tisha Marie Reichle-Aguilera's "Looking for Joey" is honorable mention; it's a good story, to be sure, but it holds a special place for me because one of its characters is a student at my high school, and part of it takes place there. (Go Cubs!)
December 12, 2023
Picked up from Octavia’s Bookshelf in Pasadena. A nice comfy (and not so comfy) read with bite-sized stories. Hits different reading stories in the city I’m getting to know personally and recognizing all the streets and little quirks about existing here.
May 20, 2024
Uninteresting drivel
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews