Putting out an APB for 3 different anthologies (guidelines in brief):

1) Heterodox Dreams for the Somnambulist
(stories to save your life--the life you save may be your own):

"Dear Writer, Send me a query of what you think literature should be doing that it isn't doing now. After a bit of debate to fortify your position, send me a story to prove it. Expect revisions. Email (preferred): blzblack@yahoo.com or mail PO Box 31266, Omaha, NE 68131.--xxoo from your favorite editor, Trent Walters"

2) Stories That (shoulda, woulda, coulda) Won the Hugo:

"Dear Writer, Query me regarding your favorite Hugo stories/novels (or what should have been). Send me a story with HUGE imagination. Expect revisions. If the beginning or end doesn't grab me, feel free try it again or another. Email (preferred): blzblack@yahoo.com or mail PO Box 31266, Omaha, NE 68131.--xxoo from your favorite editor, Trent Walters"

3) The Poetry of Pop & Pulp Culture "Dear Writer of a poetry collection, Mail it/them/or whatever in whatever form to PO Box 31266, Omaha, NE 68131. If you don't have a collection currently, send $1/5 poems, which will be refunded plus regular pay rates--I will try to open it free to any poet later.--xxoo from your favorite editor, Trent Walters"

Please read entire guidelines below & the Editor's Theory of Literature



[Image providers say: “Materials published by the U.S. Government Printing Office are in the public domain and, as such, not subject to copyright restriction. However, the Library requests users to cite the URL and Northwestern University Library if they wish to reproduce images from its poster database.” I ask: “Can you see what the editor meant by these images? If you think that all I'm looking for is politics, you are not looking beyond the images.”]

“This book,” Harlan Ellison writes of Dangerous Visions, “was constructed along specific lines of revolution... intended to shake things up... conceived out of a need for new horizons, new forms, new styles, new challenges in the literature of our times.” He goes on to say it should also entertain. It should. But I also propose all literature should be attempting this. If you’re doing what’s been done, if you add no new spin, why bother?

“This view of sf is not new to science fiction writers and critics, but it is worth restating: the essence of sf is the experiment,” Gwyneth Jones told an audience in 1988 within the context of a laboratory experiment--whether or not writers still view SF in that context is uncertain.



What I propose are three anthologies, all aimed at helping writers think out the long term goals of writing, all aimed at having the shelf-life longevity of an anthology like Dangerous Visions, if possible--why have an anthology that disappears from our minds as soon as the book is closed? why have an anthology that doesn’t make readers want to pick it up off the dusty used bookstore shelf--and most importantly all three aimed at challenging the genre. Too few seem to realize that challenges and challengers strengthen the challenged, not tear down. A tree pushed constantly by winds will stand in windstorms that unchallenged trees cannot. The elderly who challenge their minds to learning new things maintain an edge of intellect over the dwindling minds of their companions who do not. Even uncommon athletes who do not devise new challenges either plateau or fall off their performance. What readers and writers should fear is not having their beloved ideologies challenged.

In fact, I hope many will challenge me on my view of what this anthology is, so that I may make it stronger.

Like any living entity, literature should be prepared to adapt and change in the face of a challenge. Aside from a few small pockets of biodiversity, literature in general is caught in a genetic bottleneck, leaving it precariously open to endangerment should its environment change. Who among us hasn’t asked: why don’t we travel this road any longer? or why hasn’t anyone taken this path? Must we have a war in order to get people to think about life and literature?



SF used to house mind-bogglingly diverse talents: Avram Davidson and R A Lafferty for style; Heinlein for his idiosyncratic polemics that no doubt had tremendous influence on the entire counter-culture of the Sixties (if only he could get his characters to shut up and embroil the plot). Yes, we still have Harlan Ellison, Kelly Link, Joyce Carol Oates, Howard Waldrop, and Robert Sheckley, but who will be there to pick up their mantle when they've gone? And what about all those other experimental writers whose work has deeply impacted the genre that we ignore today: Barth, Barthelme, Borges, Woolf and friends? (Much as he’s maligned by some, Nicholson Baker had a fresh perspective on representing time in fiction.)

Much as we have the workshop to thank for better readers and writers in the world, it’s possible we also have it to thank for our homogenized view of literature (i.e. “we must only look to Chekhov for our inspiration.” Chekhov is incredible but, my God, there’s more than one way to tell a story). While I do not reject the good literature out now, I am not necessarily looking for people who do work like the aforementioned or following writers, I put up a website dedicated to those who expand the literary genome:

Albert Goldbarth, for example, is the kind of poet who gets me excited about literature. Check out the one and only Albert Goldbarth tribute site on the internet (I still find that a terrible misfortune).



“The arts are loathed by many vicious people who malign what their dull minds fail to understand, and make laws harmful to mankind." -- Johannes Keppler from SOMNIUM

SOMNIUM is the title of Kepler’s subversive view of the moon--subversive in that it was the first work of bona fide science fiction (albeit minoring on the fiction), and subversive in that it cast off the values of his society to get new ideas into the world.

HETERODOX DREAMS FOR THE SOMNAMBULIST (tentative title for the first proposed anthology) will be of truly experimental works that actually mean and have artistic merit--works that try to take literature in "new directions," be it in style, plot, idea, character, structure. Where should literature go? Each writer comes up with his own answer & proves it in a story. No not-stories, no not-meaning. No angst or graphic/shocking for graphic/shocking's sake.

What is “Story”?: character development with a plot. Like Henry James, I can't extricate character development from plot very well. My all-time favorite story is OF MICE AND MEN--but there's no experiment in that. Perhaps the more important question is “What is ‘character development’?” Somebody has to change--character or reader, but the latter is far more difficult to change.

What is "Not Meaning?": I mean stories whose whole purpose is not to mean. When you get to the end, you ask yourself why the hell you read it. And I'm not talking about A revelation at the end like lollipop for being good at the dentist’s, but a process of revelation like the whole friggin gingerbread house crammed down your throat.

What is “Artistic Merit?”: can you break the story down? Or is it nebulous fluff? If, when it you break down, the symbols or ideas don't line up, it lacks artistic merit.

Why bother with this high falutin’ “Art” crap in the first place? Have you forgotten the roots of literature? Gilgamesh? the Bible? Aesop? What about fairy tales transcribed from the very mouths of oral storytellers? From the beginning of time, there's a sinister auctorial purpose behind every story: stay away from strangers bearing candy (Hansel & Gretel), don't beat the crap out of the defenseless (Aesop's the boys & the frogs). Words have both connotations and denotations, manipulating the reader, tipping your hat to the careful reader of your particular stance. I ask that writers be attuned to that. What some may fear about “Art” stories is that someone's talking behind your back. Why do people dislike foreigners speaking their native tongue? If you really want to know what the foreigners are saying, learn the language. To me, careful study of language is a martial arts course against advertisers and politicians.

Titles (many just to give you another angle on my meaning; some are joke titles, but you have to be smart enough to figure out which):

SOMNIUM
HETERODOX
HETERODOX DREAMS FOR THE SOMNAMBULIST
HETERODOX DREAMS FOR THE SONOFABITCH
HETERODOXY OF DREAMS, DREAMS OF HETERODOXY
HETEROGENEITY
THE NEW PASSIVE AGGRESSIVES
DEAD LETTER OFFICE (as in stories that expand the boundaries and should have but didn’t find a literary home)
NEW VISIONS (Dangerous Visions Redux?)
NEW DIRECTIONS (okay, it’s been used, but to give you the spirit)
THE RAG AND BONE SHOP OF SF (courtesy of Robert Sheckley: as in we used to live in this stately castle on the mountainside, so why did we move into the cute cottage without a view)
THE BOAT (as in "You missed the...")
A VIOLENT STAND
ANGRY YOUNG PERSONS OF INDETERMINATE GENDER
YOUNG, DUMB & FULL OF CUM
LEARN VIVISECTION IN YOUR OWN HOME! PRACTICE ON YOUR KIDS!

Titles suggested by implication in an email from Geoff Ryman:

THE NEW ELITISTS
THE ANTI DEMAGOGUES
THE BURNT OUT FAG END OF AN ERA
POPULAR IN TOLEDO
THE ALL NEW UNDEAD MADONNA 'N' BUFFY FAN CLUB

Matt Peckham riffing off other titles:

PISSING IN THE TEACUP OF A DEMOGOGIC MOUSE
CRUX HETERODOXUS

Writers should query first at blzblack@yahoo.com with:

1) who you are and your reason for existence
2) your serious suggestion(s) or vote for title
3) what literature isn't doing
4) what it should be doing & why (come up with your own that means something to you)

[A friend asked, "But won't that make a lot of work for you and the writer?" Absolutely.]

This query should be rough draft material for a brief accompanying essay.

Rights requested: 1st acceptance but one-time rights, which is to say, once I've accepted it, you can sell it elsewhere provided whoever buys it announces that "This story is forthcoming in the anthology..." This allows the writer to make the most money possible, and it advertises for the anthology. However, when the anthology comes out, the stories should be un-archived for at least 6 months after the anthology hits. Make sure you sign away 1st rights so that the anthology has no legal battle going to press, waiting a month or several years to go to press before The New Yorker publishes it. In other words, you can sell the story twice.

Pay: 1/2 cent/word + royalties... or more if you have a name which can help sell the book (probably 3 cents/word with a max at $100)--not that brand names will have an easier time getting in, but since their names can draw readers, they deserve a larger share o’ the pie. This is subject to change but, barring job loss, should only increase--profits will be recycled to authors & the quality of the publications.

Revision: I’m a cruel & loving editor. One-draft writers may be in for a shock (one-draft writers include those who merely polish the rough spots). Expect to see m.s.s. marked up. You should have seen all the revisions a friend of mine had to make. He later turned around and sold it to Analog. Isn’t that cruel of me? That isn’t the whole story, but it’s enough.

Publication: I’m in no hurry. I expect these anthologies to be bold and hold nothing but the best work. I’ll take my time but you can expect publication within five years, perhaps sooner.

Length: I’m always looking for ways to cut. Aren’t you? Every damn word has to count: think double-minded (meaning, this is how we should be able to read your work, keeping track of two sets of intents simultaneously, like reading two parallel stories in text and Braille at the same time whose words have meaning beyond what’s apparent on the page), head & heart, passion & intellect (meaning, you should mix these ingredients liberally without sentimentality).

Who can submit: You. Anyone and his dog.



A WORD ON THE WORD “SENTIMENTALITY”: Bad. It would be nice not to need the word. CUT, CUT, CUT! Talented but sentimental writers: Jane Austen, Charles Dickens. Excessive violence can be sentimental in the other direction.

A WORD ON THE WORD “EXPERIMENT”: When someone finishes the story, if they are careful readers, they should walk away with a general sense of plot, character development, and auctorial purpose--perhaps the iceberg tip of a symbol or two. A second reading should reveal additional layers, but that’s only if a reader chooses to do so--he should not feel only puzzlement. I’m not interested in indecipherable mush unless you write as lush as Eliot in THE WASTELAND, but my anger knows no bounds when I spend hours on a difficult story or poem only to find out the writer slap-dashed the shit together to make it sound like they knew something. Sloppy writing gets a big fat zero. Established writers--that is, writers with a reputation for doing ‘x’--should stretch themselves, explore territories unfamiliar to them. As for a visual guide to experiment, perhaps the following ironic illustration will guide you to another angle on my meaning:



One experiment that is no experiment at all but puts in frequent appearances at Clarion workshops is the hide-a-story, hidden in an effort to create suspense. “Suspense,” writes Rust L. Hills, former editor of Esquire, “is not even a final response to a piece of writing: a reader left with the final response of suspense has every right to throw the book across the room.” Hills connects suspense with foreshadowing. He continues, if a little dogmatically but in order to make a vital point: “Deliberately puzzling or confusing a reader may keep him reading for a while, but at too great an expense. Even just an ‘aura’ of mystery in a story is usually just a lot of baloney. Who are these people? What are they up to? ...deliberately unintelligible so as to make the shallow seem deep.” This kind of story can actually work. Read John Barth’s “Lifestory” again. Notice how he never deliberately hides setting, character, etc. from the reader. He simply tells the story from the narrator’s perspective--and the surprise/suspense/joy of discovering who the narrator is IS NOT the point of the story, so the author does not have to hide behind his purpose. Every step of the way he allows the narrator to unveil himself. If you give the reader enough cues and clues, then the problem of communication becomes the readers’ if they choose not to think the narrative through.



Possible new takes on literature (not a prescription but to provide ideas):

Politics: a balanced or a radical perspective (an essay on this may appear in a future issue of FUHU, pending Mark’s final approval of the revision--but for radical perspective, think, well, I don't want to use Ayn Rand since I don't subscribe and don’t want Rand-pupils, but do you know how much of society subscribes to her "radical" philosophy without having read her? Everyone should read her whether or not they agree: awareness). But do not ramble. Your characters have to earn what they speak. Have you created a thirst for us to listen to these speeches? Or have your characters got diarrhea of the mouth? If your politics falls under the heading “Republican” or “Democrat,” by all means bore the internet with another blog.

This is one editor you won’t have to worry about matching politics (not that you could, anyway). You can be pro/anti-religion, pro/anti-feminism, pro/anti-eco-terrorism, or whatever floats your boat. Passion is the key. You just have to be well-reasoned and intelligent and set up no straw men. I hope to turn people’s minds away from our fucking bipolar, all-or-nothing politics: “We will die for our party’s beliefs without seriously considering anyone else’s ideas.” If you can vote all one party with a clear conscience, this means you--not that I don’t love you, anyway. It’s conceivable I may even love your stories.



Style: Humor, idiosyncratic, experiment (I may yet get a review of FUHU up, explaining why it is, so far, a last bastion for experiment)

Idea: Would have to be completely radical to sell me

Plot: anything goes though hopefully something goes

Character: one, some, none, cast of billions, more reliable unreliables, and actual character development!

Theme: Has to mean. Life sucks without it. So does literature. No pansy ass, pussy-footing around. Take a stand, dammit. Everyone has a fucking opinion. No sense in you liars lying to yourselves and others, pretending: I'm above the fray. Get your prissy butt down in dirt and dig, crawl in the mud with the rest of us worms searching for answers. Anybody can ask questions. But what good does that do? Try to come up with solutions. Of course, it won’t be the only or best answer or leave the majority of questions on an issue left unanswered, but haven’t you learned anything in -- years of your life? If I wanted ambiguity, I’ll go buy a fortune cookie (I say this, but then someone could write an apropos ambiguous story on a fortune cookie). To all those authors who prefer ambiguous endings: you better not have expressed any clear cut opinions on the war in Iraq; in fact, you better not drive to work this morning since you could get hit by lightning, or a Mack truck, or a hurricane, or a Mack truck driver drinking a hurricane; in fact, would it really matter if you died? The plusses and minuses of living can be... well, ambiguous.

Taboos: We pretend not to have any, but just a few years ago I heard editors chuckle over a writer who wanted to write about impotence. Not that I want a bunch of how-drugs-saved-my-sex-life stories, but literature is a mirror of life. What issues are we as a society not facing?



Forms: travelogues, letters, footnotes, faxes, emails, memos, minds, mediums, diaries, dictionaries, pictionaries, scholarly papers... but you will probably need more than form. You may want to see how Woody Allen perverted many genres and forms (but you will need to push experiment beyond simple parody).

Mixing Genres: We’ve seen the mystery/SF story often enough though I suppose someone out there has something different in mind. I won’t expose all my trade secrets, but one I’ve been exploring is mixing poetry and fiction--my best example of this appeared in issue 2 of Full Unit Hookup.

WARNING! CAVEAT SCRIPTOR! My main role will not be as publisher, but as editor. That means I will feel free to critique beyond spelling and grammar to your structure, kicking the tires, so to speak. This means that you should neither bow-down nor be a jack-ass. I will be the one editor you can pleasantly argue with. If I missed the point of your experiment or the subtlety of your art, I would love to be enlightened. I want to be stretched, I want to see literature in a new way.

But be prepared--I want to be able to see where you’re going, how the symbols lay out. I want to be certain readers can scribble the hell out of the margins of your story with a pencil. Literary prima donnas need not apply.

***

STORIES THAT (shoulda) WON THE HUGO

(the second proposed anthology)

One type of story I saw at Clarion is the Big-Idea/Big-Dream story--the kind of story that should (or would have at one time) contended for the hearts of fans at World Conventions. Think Dune, Ender’s Game, “A Meeting with Medusa.” Writers should include a brief comment on recently read Hugo-winning stories/novels that have impacted them. Because I’m limited on time and reading/editorial speed, I’m only opening this to Clarion graduates (or of the Odyssey or Gunn’s workshop). Say when you went to Clarion and who the instructors were.

Later, as in “not now,” in order to get writers to review the history of the genre, I intend on opening up another section of the same anthology called STORIES THAT KEPLER (woulda) WISHED HE’D WRITTEN, focusing on pre-mid-19th Century literature in which writers conjectured on science through reason of the mind, not experiment (i.e. pseudo-science). This will be open to those who have studied at Gunn’s SF Institute, read his Road to SF anthologies (or any historical anthology which includes extensive pre-SF history, Pre-Verne because Poe pulled a lot of crap outta his ass--August Derleth edited Beyond Time & Space, etc.). Don’t rewrite or strictly imitate, but pretend you are writing these to your own time: satires, utopias, voyages to moons and other strange places & peoples. Writers should include an apropos quote from one of these historical SF works or from the editors. Other stories in STORIES THAT... will also continue along the continuum of historical contexts. Or it may open to STORIES THAT (shoulda) WON THE NEBULA. Time will only tell.

blzblack@yahoo.com

***

THE POETRY OF POP & PULP CULTURE:

(the third proposed anthology)

The title I think explains itself pretty well. The myths of yore have all been transformed by new technologies, new ideas. Why keep dipping in the old when we have the new? Modernity is rife with new tropes and new ideas relatively unexploited. Here I'm looking for collections: full length or chapbooks, published or not. My purpose is to get poets to think about the larger picture in which their poems are framed, not selling the next 5 Things Not To Do When You're Undead in a Buffy Fan Club--no offense, Bruce!--which has a place in the immediately pleasurable verse but not for the long haul. I was asked--due to popularity--if this does not also qualify as pop culture. Yes, it does, but it's not what I'm looking for. I want distillations of pop that examine, illumine, deflect, reflect, refract life. With all due respect to Voltaire's Sirian Micromegas, I'm only interested in, after translation, what it all means to humanity.

To keep the submission stack reasonable, if your chapbook/collection isn’t already published, enclose $1 reading fee/5 pages--refunded upon acceptance + royalties + 1/2 cent/word. Closer to publication, I hope to open the anthology to the impoverished unpublished.

Barring an unforeseen incident, hand it to me at the Campbell/Sturgeon awards in Lawrence, KS.

Or mail it to me, again whether or not it’s been published, printed up any way you want: chapbook format or whatever, except not on obnoxious paper or in an obnoxious font unless the obnoxiousness absolutely essential to the work. These will not be returned. I will confirm receipt via email you provide.

Trent Walters PO Box 31266 Omaha, NE 68131



REMEMBER: Query on stories first, so I don't waste my time reading stories that make me wonder if you've really thought it through. You can also query me at the conference.

***

Here’s an unutilized idear for future editors: I was thinking of defraying costs via setting up a non-profit organization website where people in search of tax-breaks to invest in good literature could pay, maybe get an anthology to boot. Not an ezine, but a print anthology investors could check on. I haven’t wholly given up on the idea, but the fee to apply for non-profit status probably deters without other editors to help out in the cause. Let me know if you know of a way.