Re: What do certain magazines want?
Posted: August 03, 2017, 01:52:33 PM
Well, it may seem impractical to read the magazine, but that really is the best way to find out what kind of content they favor. Same as if you've heard about some new author who's getting popular, go find one of their books and read it. Sometimes you can get enough of a feel for it by just reading the "Look Inside" pages on Amazon.
You don't have to read a year's worth of issues to get the feel for a magazine's content; one or two issues should do it. You can pick up important little cues about the editorial tastes by looking carefully: for example, F&SF likes a sense of humor (leaning toward puns)--they even have a periodic contest which draws (and rewards) humorous responses. They also insert a fake ad into their own classifieds listing each month, referring to a story in that issue. That makes a fun little diversion.
As well, the submission guidelines sometimes include hints: F&SF has said that they don't get as many SF subs as they'd like. Beyond that, it would actually be counterproductive of them to specify details of the content that they find acceptable; they can only limit genre, and can't even actually define it very narrowly. The quality of the writing counts most, but beyond that, I think that if you get a submission past their slush-pile, they'll make suggestions for changes.
Since you mention hard SF, the best-known venue for that is Analog. I used to be a subscriber, but switched to Asimov's because (apparently associated with the recent editorial change) the quality of writing has gone down--a lot. The stories do mostly focus on hard SF, but now read more like they're coming from scientists who don't know how to write good fiction.
As to a single resource, there's probably one out there, but I don't know of it. I suspect that would be a difficult project; lots of little publications pop up and then die after a few issues.
Writing is a lot like work; if you can think of some shortcut, it won't likely save you any effort overall. Worse, it could cause you even more work, and maybe someone's ill will.
Good luck.
You don't have to read a year's worth of issues to get the feel for a magazine's content; one or two issues should do it. You can pick up important little cues about the editorial tastes by looking carefully: for example, F&SF likes a sense of humor (leaning toward puns)--they even have a periodic contest which draws (and rewards) humorous responses. They also insert a fake ad into their own classifieds listing each month, referring to a story in that issue. That makes a fun little diversion.
As well, the submission guidelines sometimes include hints: F&SF has said that they don't get as many SF subs as they'd like. Beyond that, it would actually be counterproductive of them to specify details of the content that they find acceptable; they can only limit genre, and can't even actually define it very narrowly. The quality of the writing counts most, but beyond that, I think that if you get a submission past their slush-pile, they'll make suggestions for changes.
Since you mention hard SF, the best-known venue for that is Analog. I used to be a subscriber, but switched to Asimov's because (apparently associated with the recent editorial change) the quality of writing has gone down--a lot. The stories do mostly focus on hard SF, but now read more like they're coming from scientists who don't know how to write good fiction.
As to a single resource, there's probably one out there, but I don't know of it. I suspect that would be a difficult project; lots of little publications pop up and then die after a few issues.
Writing is a lot like work; if you can think of some shortcut, it won't likely save you any effort overall. Worse, it could cause you even more work, and maybe someone's ill will.
Good luck.