Mmmm...nodding do much agreement from my place around the campfire. I know Substack is meant for independent writing but I can't help wondering if literary magazines might have their renaissance on Substack.
I don't know if this is coincidental or if such posts are daily on Substack, but I turned now to the explore tab with the thought of how to leverage the platform to form a fictionalists community and found this post. This is rather discouraging to hear, the mutual dissing, if that's how it is, even if it's directed mostly at the big fish. I thought the way to go would be to form friendly connections with other like minded writers.
First off, I'm mildly flattered that this actually made it to the "Explore" tab. Second off, it confirms the idea that writing about fiction seems to gather more immediate traction then the actual fiction. But...this can change and there are a lot of writers actively doing literary worker bee stuff on here to achieve that.
My personal experience with the dissing is from reading the "Substack Reads" comments when they spotlight a bigger author. Mostly, my daily interactions are extremely encouraging and I've never existed in a cohesive space where everyone seems to want something similar and are fumbling in the dark, asking questions, making friends, and trying to be supportive with each other from a very sincere-hearted place. I appreciate this and think it is vital.
And if you are just starting out, welcome. I published my first story on here back in June and have aggressively sought my fiction peers. Some communities that might interest you are @fictionistas, @talebones, and the curated Substack Fiction List that I have slowly been working through. I'll paste it here:
This is such a strong core concept I try to adhere to every day. Especially if I'm experiencing feelings of alienation and begin to think, "What's the point?"
At the most stripped down foundation, you are validated by yourself. My writing opens my imagination to slingshot wherever it wants, it helps me channel feelings, it is an exploration. The receiving side of that writing relationship is that it brings me endless good feelings to entertain people, and it is a tangible dream. But if I don't love it, nurture it, appreciate it in this solitude at a baseline, then how could anyone else?
I'm glad it was something positive to read. And that's awesome - I see you've been prolific the last few weeks. I checked out your "Writing Journey Volume 1". I think it's important to reflect where it all started and what drives you now (and it feels good and scary to open it all up for an audience).
Fiction takes the long view. It has to, because unlike non-fiction it must explain things to the reader. Think about the financial crash of 2007-2009. Think of what you need to explain that which was obvious at the time. Fiction very often need to create or parody characters. It must give life to localaties. For example, I doubt that most people know the capital of China during the Tang Dynasty. Or Shanghai under the Nationalist regime. Yet a story must make these thing real and inter-relate them to ideas and events in a smooth and forceful way.
Fiction is, therefore, a retrospective idea. For example, Fortress Besieged is a novel by Qian Zhongshu which is just now in the Western world and was discovered in China through the 1960s and 1970s though it was written in the late 1940s. it is a classic, but that was discovered much much much much later. Fiction is a long game.
This doesn't mean that fiction should not be highlighted by substack, because in the end, the long game is part of what they are selling.
Stirling, if I misinterpreted your response in any way, please let me know! I was trying my best to respond in a way where I considered your view, other types of fiction I've experienced, and then my personal bias for the types of stories I enjoy writing.
I see your perspective, and I'm drawn to the characterization part - my understanding is that you're saying that having the context of the historic facts later gives texture to the story. I think I disagree with it being purely retrospective - I don't think fiction is bound to looking back. I write a character who travels back and forth between historic events and the present day, and I don't think the character requires explanation - he just exists and the reader hopefully accepts him in the present and connects because of the shared emotional elements like loneliness, joy, longing, adventure. I think creating a world from scratch does have rules, but if it's built effectively with emotionally honest characters, the writer can do just about anything within that playground and have an effective story.
For a good short story, it takes time. Considered that "The Story of an Hour" by Kate Chopin was publish in 1894, Hemmingway's "Snows of Kilimanjaro" is from 1936, and the list goes on. Whereas non-fiction, with very few exceptions needs to be immediate. This means that Substack's bias will take the money that is one the table: an known name selling instant recognizable content right now. Realize that time is on the short stories side, but monetization is not.
However, this is because the management team is short sighted which is common among start-up companies. Part of the problem is the very criterion you are pitching: "shared emotional elements like loneliness, joy, longing, adventure." That can be gotten from known commodities, therefore Substack does need to reach and them will not. It also is only one aspect of showing a short story. You will get a small following and Substack does not need to do anything for you.
The question you need to ask is "What is in it for them?" Not you. Them. Remember: every person cares about themselves first with very few exceptions and a business is not one of them.
I gotcha - Yes, I definitely agree. Made me think of Goodfellas: “Fuck you, pay me.”
The brainstorm conjurer in me thinks that if the traditional publishing market has been on the decline for some time, where is that population of fiction readers now spending their dollars? My brother goes out camping in the New Mexican desert in the fall. He takes his Kindle out with a few downloaded fantasy stories and I think it is an integral part of his experience in the evening. My writer dreamer idealist self hopes that I can reach that exact audience. I want Substack to see the value in being the home of a talented base of writers who can delight the types of readers that are so invested in their favorite worlds. And if the model continues to cater toward mostly nonfiction then hey, I’m okay with leaving Stomp Roams business cards on every tack board in the city.
I remember being once concerned about this decline. I later realized that such numbers were misleading. There had been readers of fiction before the British novel boom of the 18th century, and there would be readers thereafter. Not all fiction is created equally. I think some, as it were, have the same quality of "being immediate," to borrow Stirling's terms, as non-fiction. Popular today, forgotten tomorrow. And there are such books still written, but I think that many of the readers of that kind of works of yore are today watching the tv series equivalents, or playing the video games, or watching the youtubes.
Many of the writers and their works still remembered were widely read contemporarily, but there were many other writers whose readers together made the genre of "the novel," say, more popular at the time than today. There were less alternative forms of narrative at the time. Nowadays there are more, but I believe that textual fiction can do things that film or television cannot (and vice versa), and that there is and will remain an audience for those things.
I really agree with this - I think of it as a spectrum, and there are so many forms a story can take. For the style of story I write on here, I can in one way imagine a sense of contemporary immediacy like those dime novels from the late 1800s', except translated to a sasquatch and his adventures.
Coy editing is necessary, but unimportant to point out.
I preach the basics here because 99% of people do not understand them: "Show don't tell" "Have multiple levels of meaning" "Conflict moves characters and plot" "Write drunk, edit sober" "You do not write a book you rewrite it."
It is in the source material: Chekhov, Hemingway, TS Eliot, Lewis, etc.
I'm curious but not sure what you mean. Fiction works differently than non-fiction, yes. Reading fiction from far away in space or time (and particularly, both) can be more of a challenge, but often the appeal is precisely there, experiencing the unfamiliar. But the fiction writers of Substack, anyway, are kicking and breathing.
What took time for "Snows of Kilimanjaro"? Maybe that's what I assume wrongly, but I believe Hemingway was rather popular already in his lifetime. Melville or, for that matter, Van Gogh would not live to see the appreciation their work would inspire in others, but I think that's rather the exception. Of course every generation reinterprets old works, nobody gets to know how posterity takes their work, but I think most who were appreciated in their afterlife were already appreciated in their lifetime. Or did I get you completely wrong?
With non-fiction you get popular for a quickly if you document something that is important. Take Silent Spring by Rachel Carlson, a book simply flew off the shelves because it was a cleanly written your account of a single problem which was obvious to Carlson and she then made it clear to other people.
Fiction is orthogonal to popularity: sometimes the fiction author is popular, even wildly so, and sometimes the the sound of clapping is measured in crickets. For example, Herman Melville was popular with is earlier works but Moby Dick wasn't considered a success when by stretch of imagination. Frankenstein sold 500 copies. You can take any measure and you will find fiction authors in that zone whether it is popular or unpopular. This is because for fiction people want a particular kind of writing whether or not it is good. See 50 Shades of Gray, etc. and many etc. With fiction the craft which is the hallmark of any really fine fiction is only discovered in retrospect. Poe did not make much money while he lived and yet the craft screams from almost every page of his best stories.
A good example is film noir: and only became popular after World War II even though many of the novels had been written before World War II, and dealt with the depression and its effects. During the war Hollywood needed to be upbeat because of the situation on a global scale, it is only after the war which it could examine some of the darker aspects that were present in the US.
Oops, sorry. I managed to mangle it, thinking that "it takes time" was referring to what Jonathan wished to accomplish with his work (when he mentioned his brother), which only came in the following reply.
"Much of this journey does exist in a night black wilderness. Even if you have a partner in the next room, you are opening vulnerably, sharing pieces of your insides. You’re rowing in the dark to the forest sounds. But there are sparked-up camps out here. These fellow creators are also finding their way, and now they share their stories."
Excellent summation, Jonathan! I really enjoyed the way you pieced together how most of us feel, and what we're after. At some point our fiction community will rise above the other categories, and my hope is that when we do we celebrate and build up the next group to do the same.
This is really bizarre. I'm definitely not blocking you and I checked on Notes to make sure I hadn't muted you accidentally. I can also go to your profile and see all of your Notes. If you go to my profile, are you able to click on my Notes tab and see it?
Mmmm...nodding do much agreement from my place around the campfire. I know Substack is meant for independent writing but I can't help wondering if literary magazines might have their renaissance on Substack.
I hope so, I have been actively seeking them out. There are a well-intentioned handful bubbling up.
I don't know if this is coincidental or if such posts are daily on Substack, but I turned now to the explore tab with the thought of how to leverage the platform to form a fictionalists community and found this post. This is rather discouraging to hear, the mutual dissing, if that's how it is, even if it's directed mostly at the big fish. I thought the way to go would be to form friendly connections with other like minded writers.
First off, I'm mildly flattered that this actually made it to the "Explore" tab. Second off, it confirms the idea that writing about fiction seems to gather more immediate traction then the actual fiction. But...this can change and there are a lot of writers actively doing literary worker bee stuff on here to achieve that.
My personal experience with the dissing is from reading the "Substack Reads" comments when they spotlight a bigger author. Mostly, my daily interactions are extremely encouraging and I've never existed in a cohesive space where everyone seems to want something similar and are fumbling in the dark, asking questions, making friends, and trying to be supportive with each other from a very sincere-hearted place. I appreciate this and think it is vital.
And if you are just starting out, welcome. I published my first story on here back in June and have aggressively sought my fiction peers. Some communities that might interest you are @fictionistas, @talebones, and the curated Substack Fiction List that I have slowly been working through. I'll paste it here:
https://kindly-henley-67a.notion.site/SUBSTACK-FICTION-WRITERS-eb83a0358a754c549cce9ed6c1ccff6c
> Second off, it confirms the idea that writing about fiction seems to gather more immediate traction then the actual fiction
Yes, I thought of that when writing the reply.
—
Thanks, I'll give these a look. That story is "Stomp huffs shine and tries to love himsef"?
Has anything from that list particularly caught your eye?
Ultimately, the writing process itself has to be its own reward.
This is such a strong core concept I try to adhere to every day. Especially if I'm experiencing feelings of alienation and begin to think, "What's the point?"
At the most stripped down foundation, you are validated by yourself. My writing opens my imagination to slingshot wherever it wants, it helps me channel feelings, it is an exploration. The receiving side of that writing relationship is that it brings me endless good feelings to entertain people, and it is a tangible dream. But if I don't love it, nurture it, appreciate it in this solitude at a baseline, then how could anyone else?
Thank you for this post. I'm sharing the third chapter of my serliailsied novella today!
I'm glad it was something positive to read. And that's awesome - I see you've been prolific the last few weeks. I checked out your "Writing Journey Volume 1". I think it's important to reflect where it all started and what drives you now (and it feels good and scary to open it all up for an audience).
Yes I'll see how long 3 posts a week lasts! Thank you for checking it out, and I totally agree with your thoughts.
I agre: "be the kind of person who encourages”.
As a new fiction author, this feels like a good time to be joining Substack.
Welcome to Substack and, absolutely, being that kind of person is important.
I think it is - it’s like one of those coral reef flora beds that bursts up underwater after a volcano cools.
I love it!
My other (non fiction) new book is about political legitimacy emerging 'bottom up' from the conflict and struggle against the junta post coup Burma.
Emergence!
Fiction takes the long view. It has to, because unlike non-fiction it must explain things to the reader. Think about the financial crash of 2007-2009. Think of what you need to explain that which was obvious at the time. Fiction very often need to create or parody characters. It must give life to localaties. For example, I doubt that most people know the capital of China during the Tang Dynasty. Or Shanghai under the Nationalist regime. Yet a story must make these thing real and inter-relate them to ideas and events in a smooth and forceful way.
Fiction is, therefore, a retrospective idea. For example, Fortress Besieged is a novel by Qian Zhongshu which is just now in the Western world and was discovered in China through the 1960s and 1970s though it was written in the late 1940s. it is a classic, but that was discovered much much much much later. Fiction is a long game.
This doesn't mean that fiction should not be highlighted by substack, because in the end, the long game is part of what they are selling.
Stirling, if I misinterpreted your response in any way, please let me know! I was trying my best to respond in a way where I considered your view, other types of fiction I've experienced, and then my personal bias for the types of stories I enjoy writing.
I see your perspective, and I'm drawn to the characterization part - my understanding is that you're saying that having the context of the historic facts later gives texture to the story. I think I disagree with it being purely retrospective - I don't think fiction is bound to looking back. I write a character who travels back and forth between historic events and the present day, and I don't think the character requires explanation - he just exists and the reader hopefully accepts him in the present and connects because of the shared emotional elements like loneliness, joy, longing, adventure. I think creating a world from scratch does have rules, but if it's built effectively with emotionally honest characters, the writer can do just about anything within that playground and have an effective story.
For a good short story, it takes time. Considered that "The Story of an Hour" by Kate Chopin was publish in 1894, Hemmingway's "Snows of Kilimanjaro" is from 1936, and the list goes on. Whereas non-fiction, with very few exceptions needs to be immediate. This means that Substack's bias will take the money that is one the table: an known name selling instant recognizable content right now. Realize that time is on the short stories side, but monetization is not.
However, this is because the management team is short sighted which is common among start-up companies. Part of the problem is the very criterion you are pitching: "shared emotional elements like loneliness, joy, longing, adventure." That can be gotten from known commodities, therefore Substack does need to reach and them will not. It also is only one aspect of showing a short story. You will get a small following and Substack does not need to do anything for you.
The question you need to ask is "What is in it for them?" Not you. Them. Remember: every person cares about themselves first with very few exceptions and a business is not one of them.
I gotcha - Yes, I definitely agree. Made me think of Goodfellas: “Fuck you, pay me.”
The brainstorm conjurer in me thinks that if the traditional publishing market has been on the decline for some time, where is that population of fiction readers now spending their dollars? My brother goes out camping in the New Mexican desert in the fall. He takes his Kindle out with a few downloaded fantasy stories and I think it is an integral part of his experience in the evening. My writer dreamer idealist self hopes that I can reach that exact audience. I want Substack to see the value in being the home of a talented base of writers who can delight the types of readers that are so invested in their favorite worlds. And if the model continues to cater toward mostly nonfiction then hey, I’m okay with leaving Stomp Roams business cards on every tack board in the city.
I remember being once concerned about this decline. I later realized that such numbers were misleading. There had been readers of fiction before the British novel boom of the 18th century, and there would be readers thereafter. Not all fiction is created equally. I think some, as it were, have the same quality of "being immediate," to borrow Stirling's terms, as non-fiction. Popular today, forgotten tomorrow. And there are such books still written, but I think that many of the readers of that kind of works of yore are today watching the tv series equivalents, or playing the video games, or watching the youtubes.
Many of the writers and their works still remembered were widely read contemporarily, but there were many other writers whose readers together made the genre of "the novel," say, more popular at the time than today. There were less alternative forms of narrative at the time. Nowadays there are more, but I believe that textual fiction can do things that film or television cannot (and vice versa), and that there is and will remain an audience for those things.
I really agree with this - I think of it as a spectrum, and there are so many forms a story can take. For the style of story I write on here, I can in one way imagine a sense of contemporary immediacy like those dime novels from the late 1800s', except translated to a sasquatch and his adventures.
You don't want to know, as an editor, what I see here.
Your comment had me going back through my response looking for copyediting mistakes. But I’d love to hear an editor’s perspective, too.
Coy editing is necessary, but unimportant to point out.
I preach the basics here because 99% of people do not understand them: "Show don't tell" "Have multiple levels of meaning" "Conflict moves characters and plot" "Write drunk, edit sober" "You do not write a book you rewrite it."
It is in the source material: Chekhov, Hemingway, TS Eliot, Lewis, etc.
Copy editing is something anyone can do.
I'm curious but not sure what you mean. Fiction works differently than non-fiction, yes. Reading fiction from far away in space or time (and particularly, both) can be more of a challenge, but often the appeal is precisely there, experiencing the unfamiliar. But the fiction writers of Substack, anyway, are kicking and breathing.
What took time for "Snows of Kilimanjaro"? Maybe that's what I assume wrongly, but I believe Hemingway was rather popular already in his lifetime. Melville or, for that matter, Van Gogh would not live to see the appreciation their work would inspire in others, but I think that's rather the exception. Of course every generation reinterprets old works, nobody gets to know how posterity takes their work, but I think most who were appreciated in their afterlife were already appreciated in their lifetime. Or did I get you completely wrong?
With non-fiction you get popular for a quickly if you document something that is important. Take Silent Spring by Rachel Carlson, a book simply flew off the shelves because it was a cleanly written your account of a single problem which was obvious to Carlson and she then made it clear to other people.
Fiction is orthogonal to popularity: sometimes the fiction author is popular, even wildly so, and sometimes the the sound of clapping is measured in crickets. For example, Herman Melville was popular with is earlier works but Moby Dick wasn't considered a success when by stretch of imagination. Frankenstein sold 500 copies. You can take any measure and you will find fiction authors in that zone whether it is popular or unpopular. This is because for fiction people want a particular kind of writing whether or not it is good. See 50 Shades of Gray, etc. and many etc. With fiction the craft which is the hallmark of any really fine fiction is only discovered in retrospect. Poe did not make much money while he lived and yet the craft screams from almost every page of his best stories.
A good example is film noir: and only became popular after World War II even though many of the novels had been written before World War II, and dealt with the depression and its effects. During the war Hollywood needed to be upbeat because of the situation on a global scale, it is only after the war which it could examine some of the darker aspects that were present in the US.
Oops, sorry. I managed to mangle it, thinking that "it takes time" was referring to what Jonathan wished to accomplish with his work (when he mentioned his brother), which only came in the following reply.
"Much of this journey does exist in a night black wilderness. Even if you have a partner in the next room, you are opening vulnerably, sharing pieces of your insides. You’re rowing in the dark to the forest sounds. But there are sparked-up camps out here. These fellow creators are also finding their way, and now they share their stories."
Excellent summation, Jonathan! I really enjoyed the way you pieced together how most of us feel, and what we're after. At some point our fiction community will rise above the other categories, and my hope is that when we do we celebrate and build up the next group to do the same.
Did you remove your note Brian, because now I can’t seem to find it and it’s such a powerful message!
Hmm, I did not! Does this get you to it?
https://substack.com/@futurethief/note/c-41348234
It says "this note is not available." Maybe you're blocking me? 😆🤓
Ut oh - controversy!
This is really bizarre. I'm definitely not blocking you and I checked on Notes to make sure I hadn't muted you accidentally. I can also go to your profile and see all of your Notes. If you go to my profile, are you able to click on my Notes tab and see it?
https://substack.com/@futurethief/notes
For whatever it's worth, I can see the note!