[Rocket Sheep]

Lem? Dick? Turtledove? Rob Grant? Richard Harland?

[Radthorne]

PS. I hate it when people are nice to me all the time.

We'll all keep that in mind. :D

[lin]

Definitely toss Moore in there. He's one of the three funniest writers alive.

[Banger]

Too dark for the US? Try Aus or the UK. We like things a shade darker, and good social commentary on the US we find interesting. Vandermeer is doing things at a level of dark we think of as normal... but we didn't have "burbling saditude" or meerkats.

Actually, I've sent it to both UK and Australian magazines. I got a form rejection from Interzone, and while getting rejected in the final round at Andromeda Spaceways Inflight Magazine, the ASIM readers who read it said, "This is oddball space opera. Not my thing, but I think it's okay." and "Nice to see a light-hearted comedy piece. I like it." This is a story featuring cannibalism, alien genocide, galactic conquest, scientific experimentation upon unwilling sentient beings, a global climate crisis, a paranoiac star chamber proceeding, the death of a spaceship crew, and an evisceration. But apparently it's a light-hearted oddball space opera.

Also if the obvious social commentary has gone over the heads of all but one, you probably need to make it a bit more obvious. You are writing for the audience after all, and if they're not "getting" it... who are you writing for?

This is always the toughest thing for me - keeping consistent with my vision of the story while bearing in mind an audience reading it. I'm writing for an audience of people like me. If I make the commentary more obvious, it will read heavy-handed to me, and then I would be writing stories for an audience that doesn't include me. I would be writing stories I don't like.

I would rather write a bunch of stories that mean something to me but don't sell than a bunch of stories that I'm tailoring for an audience that doesn't include me, because then the stories don't mean anything to me. And believe me, I have worked on story ideas that from the start I thought would have little to no chance of ever being published (unless I became popular, in which case, pretty much anything I wrote would become published) because the development of the ideas into a narrative is ultimately more important to me than making money out of the endeavor, and when it comes down to it, I can always just post the story on my livejournal or something. But I'm very much a beginner when it comes to writing fiction, and I send out stories as much for the feedback as to see if anyone wants to publish them. As such, what frustrated me more about the ASIM rejection was not the rejection itself, but the readers' comments, which though somewhat positive, seemed to have completely missed the point. I would rather it be that they rejected the story because they saw the darkness and commentary, but thought that my prose writing (e.g., description, dialogue, etc.) needed work.

[lin]

This is a story featuring cannibalism, alien genocide, galactic conquest, scientific experimentation upon unwilling sentient beings, a global climate crisis, a paranoiac star chamber proceeding, the death of a spaceship crew, and an evisceration.

Have you considered Christian Science Monthly?

Regarding ASIM...I'm not sure you realize how rare it is to get any sort of feedback or commentary from editors. They are telling you that they didn't pass on it because it sucked--therefore to keep trying other markets.

The idea that you would have a preference on why you get rejected and hold it against them is peculiar. Lap it up and move on.

If you think something is dark and brooding and two editors think it's a light oddball comedy, it might BE a comment on your writing style, actually.

[KatG]

Yes, it is all in how you do the cannibalism. (See Christopher Moore's Island of the Sequined Love Nun.) Dark things can be inherently funny, in a grim way, and all comic material is at its heart satirical, so they may indeed get the commentary but feel you are going for the silly.

It doesn't take much for people to feel you are doing comedy. Scott Lynch's novel, The Lies of Locke Lamora, for instance, is a very noir crime story, with two main characters who are perfectly willing to kill or harm innocent people if they have to because such people are in their way and whose moderate heroism is done almost entirely for the purposes of vengeance and religion. Yet, because Lynch has some humorous dialogue and a slightly dark comic bit or two, a lot of people see his novel as "light" and a humorous romp.

Comedy of course can be endearing, which can make even a evivisection seem like not such a bad thing. In fantasy, it is a strong tradition. In SF, it's been present but the SF community is often concerned with people making fun of SF and so, there's perhaps a certain amount of uneasiness about humorous SF. Still, though, in recent years, there seems to be more interest in it.

Perhaps Banger, though, the best thing to do is present your story as Vonnegut-like. Vonnegut's work is satirical, dark, commentary, and sometimes space opera, but people seem to respect it. I don't know if your work is close to his in style at all or not, but it might be a way to frame it. Still, comedy of any form is always going to be interpreted differently by different people.

[Rocket Sheep]

Actually ASIM, Aurealis, and Antipodean SF, all give feedback on every submission, so do Agog and Orb. Small press in Australia have good manners... altho, when you know the editors, feed back like "It's well written, but I just fooking hated it," is an odd way to deliver good manners.

[Banger]

Regarding ASIM...I'm not sure you realize how rare it is to get any sort of feedback or commentary from editors. They are telling you that they didn't pass on it because it sucked--therefore to keep trying other markets.

I have a large stack of form rejections that attests to how rare it is to get feedback from editors.

The idea that you would have a preference on why you get rejected and hold it against them is peculiar. Lap it up and move on.

I don't think it's peculiar that in the rare instance in which I do receive feedback that I would hope that it be helpful. I understand that you're suggesting I give the editors the benefit of the doubt but I'm having a hard time understanding their description of my story.

If you think something is dark and brooding and two editors think it's a light oddball comedy, it might BE a comment on your writing style, actually.

When did I say that I thought the story was dark and brooding? Is it even possible to write a story that is dark and brooding in tone, containing dark content, and yet be a comedy? I can't even think of such a story, but would be interested in hearing an example.

In terms of writing comedy, there is the notion of decorum (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decorum), of tone matching content. The classical definition of comedy said that its content should deal with lesser people and less important things, and that its tone should therefore be light. Of course, shortly after people started talking about decorum in comedy, other people started to violate the rule.

If someone writes a story that is both light in tone and content, it's a light comedy, which is what I thought Rocket Sheep was warning against in terms of trying to get sff comedy published. If someone writes a story that is very serious in tone and light in content, it's a mock epic (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mock-heroic). If someone writes a story that is light in tone and dark in content, it's a dark or black comedy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_comedy), not a light comedy. Or am I misunderstanding the definitions of these terms? Because based on these definitions, the story I wrote was a dark, not light, comedy, which is why I scratched my head when I read how it was described by the editors.

Perhaps Banger, though, the best thing to do is present your story as Vonnegut-like. Vonnegut's work is satirical, dark, commentary, and sometimes space opera, but people seem to respect it. I don't know if your work is close to his in style at all or not, but it might be a way to frame it. Still, comedy of any form is always going to be interpreted differently by different people.

Vonnegut is one of my favorite authors, and I do think that his narrative style, at least in terms of narrative exposition and the commentary contained therein, influenced this story. The character description and action owes more to Pratchett. I think it's in my own voice though - I'm making these attributions after the fact.

[lin]

In terms of writing comedy, there is the notion of decorum, of tone matching content. The classical definition of comedy said that its content should deal with lesser people and less important things, and that its tone should therefore be light. Of course, shortly after people started talking about decorum in comedy, other people started to violate the rule.

You do realize, I hope, that everthing in that quote is sheer nonsense?

[Banger]

You do realize, I hope, that everthing in that quote is sheer nonsense?

What is sheer nonsense? The historical evolution of different forms of comedy in Western literature?

Are you trying to make a point or just trying to provoke? If it's the former, explain your point. If it's the latter, please stop posting.