Submissions, Interviews and Connie Willis

First, welcome Stuart, my first commenter whom I don’t know, and almost the first to whom I’m not related. Yea!

I have a theory that submitting stories to markets is a lot like interviewing. For some interviews, it will be clear you are a very nice person, with lots of skills, and not right for the job. Editors, like hiring managers, have to make the cut based on what they need. As someone who’s hired a lot of people, I can tell you that I remember a lot of nice, skilled people I didn’t hire. Some were just barely beat out by a more suited candidate. Some were wrong for the job but I wished I’d had something for them because I knew they’d be a great addition to the team. Some were just fascinating and I wished I could give them my card and go have a beer with them.

The difference between writing and interviewing is that I believe almost every person being has many jobs they’re suited for. But many stories should never see the light of day. I have a decent track record hiring talented people. With writing, I’m still learning to tell the difference between a dud and a winner.

On a different topic, I found the article I referenced in my comment on my last post. Connie Willis and Persistence The Connie WIllis bit is the twelfth paragraph down.

One thought on “Submissions, Interviews and Connie Willis

  1. Thanks for the welcome!

    I saw your pimp on Whatever a couple weeks ago. I am also trying to write as I take a break from my real job. I am not sure what I want to get out of this experience. Maybe just to see if I can do it – if I am any good.

    I think you are right about editors simply picking what they need. I have tended to identify myself with my work, as in, I am what I do. That kind of thinking is somewhat limiting if one is not satisfied with their work. This new direction may be one of constant rejection. I wonder why I am compelled to follow it.


Comments are closed.