Post History

Source: https://writers.stackexchange.com/a/38298
License name: CC BY-SA 3.0
License URL: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/

Source: https://writers.stackexchange.com/a/38298
License name: CC BY-SA 3.0
License URL: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/

_Asimov's_ is one of the best-known, most-respected magazines in the SF genre.

Their volume of submissions is immense (I don't know precise numbers, but e.g. _F&SF_ very recently got [192 submissions in a two-day span](https://twitter.com/ccfinlay/status/1025454450649968645), after a one-month submission freeze).

They publish six issues a year; with usually one novella, _maybe_ two in an issue.

Your cover letter might be a factor, but... the _only_ explanation? That's pushing things a little far. "This was not one of their ten favorite novellas that year" seems like it should merit _some_ consideration.

It's important to understand the following things:

- **This is an uphill battle.** You have a _vast_ array of competition. That includes a great number of skilled, beloved pros who _became_ skilled pros by learning how to write things that work really, really well -- at least for some readers. It's not a surprise that it's tough for newcomers to break in -- they're up against the best, new and old.
- **Each editor's taste is different.** One editor loving your story doesn't mean another will too. (One editor _hating_ your story doesn't mean you shouldn't send it right on to the next one!) This isn't just about who's "best", it's about a particular taste, a particular sensibility -- and even just what else that editor has in inventory, or what kind of mix of styles they're trying to collect together.
- **Magazines are not going to give you feedback.** Some will, and that's awesome. Most won't, because that's not their job. Because they get hundreds of submissions and can't respond in depth to more than a few. Sometimes, because if they _do_ try to offer feedback with their rejections, then they'll get complaints and crankiness in response.
- At the same time, **it's in a magazine's best interest to nurture newer writers** , because that's how a magazine keeps itself alive and vibrant. A magazine that's courted a great writer nobody else has, an author who submits to them first, is a fantastic edge. And in the long run, today's popular authors may wander off to longer fiction, or retire; magazines want good writers tomorrow, too.

As for cover letters, certainly they can be _a_ factor. Some authors are famous enough for their name to have cachet, and yes, that can be worth investing in. (You still don't want to buy bad stories from popular authors, though; people won't stay subscribed just for the impressive covers.)

Perhaps more to the point, just knowing that an author has been published _a little_ encourages a little more trust, a little more leeway. A confusing opening from a complete novice might feel incompetent -- from somebody more accomplished, hey, maybe it's intentional, maybe they're building up to something. An ending you can spot a mile away, might be worth reading on a bit to see if a competent author has a trick up their sleeve. So, yeah, you might give an MS another few pages if you know the author's qualified for the SFWA.

But ultimately, it's the story that readers are there for, and that's what the editors and readers are trying to find. There's no need to disparage them on account of one incident -- or not to listen when they speak about their considerations and what things look like on their side.

Expect rejections. Expect _many_ rejections. That makes sense -- and if you keep on, you'll get past 'em, too. All the best :-D

Original score: 3