SF Workshop Chat with Dr. Stanley Schmidt
Analog magazine editor, July 2002

- transcript from the 2002 SF Writing Workshop instant-messenger discussion with Stan Schmidt -

cmckit: Hi Stan, Chris here on behalf of Jim Gunn's Science Fiction Writers Workshop - testing

stanleyschmidt44: Got it. So are we all set?

cmckit: Yes, great! We officially start in half an hour. Just wanted to run a test first. thanks.

stanleyschmidt44: OK, I'll be ready.

tmseay: Hi. This is Thomas Seay, typing:
Larry Taylor, Chuck Haines, Sean Johnston, Chuck Marsters, J. Cheney, Madeleine Dimond, Nolen Harsh, plus special-guest instructors Kij Johnson and Chris McKitterick.

jgunn: How many manuscripts do you get per month?

stanleyschmidt44: And this is Stan Schmidt, typing on behalf of myself.
How many manuscripts? It varies seasonally and sometimes unpredictably, but typically 400-500.

jgunn: And of those, how many do you accept for publication?

stanleyschmidt44: About 5 or 6.

jgunn: Of these, how many are from first time authors?

stanleyschmidt44: There may not be any in a particular month. I'd guess, without having counted, that we typically publish 3-5 new authors in a year. But we don't make any special effort to publish a certain number of new authors. How new or experienced you are makes little or no difference to how likely I am to buy your story, and when it does make a difference, the kind of difference might surprise you. Mike Flynn likes to tell about the time I sent him a letter saying, "I'd be very excited if I got this from a new author, but I know you can do it better."

jgunn: Do you read them all the manuscripts yourself?

tmseay: (There's the first typo of the day.)

stanleyschmidt44: Yep!
(Aside: Actually, I've already made some typos, but I caught them before I sent.)
Two reasons for reading them all myself:
(1) One of the most important parts of my job is recognizing a talented writer who hasn't yet become a good writer, and that's not always easy.
(2) The biggest kick I get from this job is discovering talented new writers, and if I say _I_ discovered somebody, I want it to be true!

jgunn: How much of each manuscript do you read?

stanleyschmidt44: I read at least the first couple slowly enough to get a good feel for style and technique, and then at least look at every page to see if anything catches my eye. I can read _very_ fast to get the gist of something and look for things that stand out, but things I get really interested in won't let me speed read them. Those are the ones that have a chance of being bought.

jgunn: Where do you read them?

stanleyschmidt44: Most of my reading I do at home, which has far fewer uncontrollable distractions than the office. In particular, slush I _have_ to read at home because I couldn't carry enough to keep me busy for the duration of my weekly train rides in and out of the office. On the other hand, the train ride is a good time to do some of my "pro" reading (unless there's a particularly good sunset!). Incidentally, by "pro" here, I don't necessarily mean people who are already well known or selling regularly. It also includes anything I found in the slush pile and got too interested in to speed-read.

jgunn: What turns you on to a story?

stanleyschmidt44: That's hard to define generally, but commonly the answer includes some striking idea or way of looking at something that hasn't occurred to me before. Of course, really engaging characters and sparkling narration help too, and the stories that impress me most tend to have all those features.

jgunn: What turns you off from reading a story? At what point do you stop reading a story?

stanleyschmidt44: OK, now I understand.
(As you've probably guessed, I haven't used AIM before, so I'm just getting acquainted with it as we go.)
To the question: I usually at least speed-read to the end, but I may go faster and faster, and that's not good for the author! I can give up pretty early, in fairly rare cases, if it becomes apparent very early in the story that it's based on a gross misconception or nonsense science, or that the author's style is flat-out unreadable. (I wouldn't expect that to happen with any of you folks!)
Incidentally, I remember Jim saying in _The Science of Science Fiction Writers_ that editors are always looking for a reason to say no. That's excellent advice for writers to keep in mind, but as an editor I actually see it a little differently.

stanleyschmidt44: I don't need a special reason to say no, because saying no is what I routinely do to 98% of submissions, even if I like them all, because I must. What I need a special reason for is _buying_ a story, so something must make it "jump out of the pile."

Larry: What is of value to mention in a cover letter? Clarion? Other workshops? Previous semi-pro publications? Reviews? Where should authors stop telling things?

stanleyschmidt44: I'm always interested in knowing anything like that about your background, but can't spend a lot of time reading it. And it really has no effect on your story's chances, though it may give me an idea what it would be like to work with you. The only time you _need_ a cover letter is if there's something I need to know that isn't obvious in the story. E.g., that it's a rewrite of something I saw last year. You should tell me that, and how you changed it. If I made comments on an earlier version, please include a copy of my letter.

Sean: Many consider Analog oriented toward hard SF, while Asimov's is inclined more toward soft SF. Do you consider this accurate? Are there other differences between the magazines?

stanleyschmidt44: There's some truth in it, but I'm not completely comfortable with it because some people think it means we're more interested in machines than in people. All I mean by "hard SF" is that some bit of speculative science is integral to the story (you can't take it out), and the author makes a reasonable effort to make sure it's plausible. But I interpret that pretty broadly, too.

Larry: I understand that the limit for a short story is supposed to be 7500 words, but most editors I've talked to want less than that. How long do you really want a short story to be?

stanleyschmidt44: Long enough to do the story justice, and no longer Sometimes that is 7500; the shortest I ever published was _zero_. Actually, I like to have a mix of lengths on hand; it makes it easier to put issues together. Also, I hope you all realize that we also publish novelettes (7500-17500), novellas (17500-40000, though we can seldom use the 20-40K range), and occasional serialized novels (40-100K).

Madeleine: In your rejection letters, what are the clues that you want to see a story rewritten?

stanleyschmidt44: If I write a personal letter at all, it almost always means I have at least some interest in seeing a rewrite, and if I make specific suggestions or complaints, that usually means I have quite a bit. I almost never say "Do this and I'll buy it," though. I'm more likely to tell you what bothers me about it, with the hope that you'll find your own way to change it so we both like it better.

Larry: What percentage of your rejections do you personalize?

stanleyschmidt44: As a very rough estimate, I'll say it averages somewhere around 10%. It may be more during a slow spell, or less when I'm swamped and struggling to dig it out. We also have a handful of "semi-personal" form letters that either mention a common problem that a story has, or "stand in" when I like a story enough that I'd like to give a more personal response but don't have time.

Larry: About response times... How long does it take you to reject a story that you know you're going to reject? How long does it take to reject one you're considering buying? And how long does it take you to buy a story?

stanleyschmidt44: Slush that doesn't grab me and slow me down from speedreading usually starts home within a couple of weeks after it gets here. (Unless I've been on vacation; nobody reads for me then, either, so I have a lot of catching up to do afterward.) It may take a couple of months to buy a story or give an in-depth critique on one I'm seriously interested in because those take more time - and I have to keep my inventory within certain limits.

ChuckH: Do you ever gain a pre-judgement on writers whom you have repeatedly rejected? Do you ever see improvement in writers who have repeated rejects?

stanleyschmidt44: Most writers who eventually sell (myself included) had repeated rejections before that happens. As George Scithers used to say, I don't reject writers, just pieces of paper with typing on them. Even if I've seen nothing of interest in two dozen stories you sent me before, I'll still read each new one with hope. People do improve, sometimes suddenly and dramatically. (I could give you a good example, but it will have to wait for another box!)

cmckit: Sounds like Jim's question will make a good follow-up, then: Do you have any success stories that really stand out for you? (By which I mean, any success stories in working with writers.)

stanleyschmidt44: I think of 3 offhand. I'll try to fit each into one box. One was an undergraduate student of mine who showed me many stories, before and after I started editing. All made different mistakes, but I never saw much change in overall quality. Then one day he sent me a blockbuster, and he's been doing it ever since - consistently but not often enough. He's been a Hugo and/or Nebula finalist at least twice.

stanleyschmidt44: #2: A lawyer sent me a long story with so many flaws in execution I spent a morning writing 7 pages to teach him to write concisely instead of like a lawyer. A couple of revisions later, I bought the story. With nothing else in print, it made the Hugo ballot and he made the Campbell ballot (the one for best new writer).

stanleyschmidt44: #3: Story from an unknown that had a lot I liked and a lot of problems. I was going to a convention near his home, so we talked about it there. 1st revision was worse; 2nd still worse. Months go by; big envelope comes with fat story under same title. I groan, but cover letter says (verbatim): "Try this," and I do. That version was everything I'd hoped for in the first place.

cmckit: Are these success stories a big part of the reward for being an editor?

stanleyschmidt44: The biggest! They don't happen often, but they make it all worthwhile. Of course, there's also the fact that practically all our writers turn out to be fascinating and likable people, and I get to know them at least through correspondence, and often at conventions.

Larry: Is the slushpile getting better?

stanleyschmidt44: I think maybe it is. Certainly it looks better - a lot of the kinds of stories that used to come in scrawled in yellow ink on lined purple paper are now just as likely to be neatly laser-printed and spell-checked. (Of course, that's not all good. As my brother says, the computer has made it too easy to make bad writing look good!)

ChuckM: How many and what kind of conventions do you typically attend? Are they fruitful?

stanleyschmidt44: Ideally, I try to make about three a year. That always includes the Nebula Awards and the World SF Convention, and often a regional somewhere - commonly one that I attend as some sort of guest. I practically always find them productive, and stimulating to me as both editor and writer.

Larry: What do you consider the value of online critiquing, like through Critters?

stanleyschmidt44: I haven't decided, and I suspect it (like any workshopping) is very good for some writers and very bad for others. One reservation I have about most workshopping is that you're trying to please a whole bunch of people who may have wildly different preferences. In my own writing, maybe because there's some truth in that and maybe just because I started out working in isolation and got used to it, I still rarely talk about work in progress except to my agent and editors who've shown an interest in it.

Nolen: What is your policy on stories that have been published overseas?

cmckit: Also, what about online publication?

stanleyschmidt44: I don't absolutely rule out stories that have been published overseas, at least in languages other than English - but I have a strong preference for stories that have never appeared anywhere else. And that emphatically includes online. I sometimes get a story with a cover letter saying it's been posted on the author's website, and that immediately disqualifies it for us.

Sean: Do many of your short story writers go on to get novels published, proportionally speaking? Do many continue sending in shorts even while doing well in the novel market?

stanleyschmidt44: A quite common pattern is for short story writers to get noticed by agents or book publishers and get enticed away with book contracts, which then keep them too busy to write much short fiction. They'll often keep doing _some_ short stuff, but the amount drops way off - which is a major reason why I _have_ to be constantly watching for new talent!

ChuckM: What's your policy concerning writers visiting your offices?

stanleyschmidt44: I like it, at least with writers with whom I've established at least a start on a working relationship. Obviously, I can't encourage everybody in the slushpile to come up, but if I've bought stories from you, or even just sent letters indicating that I hope to soon, I'd like to meet you. So if you're in that position and you're going to be in New York, let me know and we'll try to set something up. (I may even buy lunch!) It is important to arrange it first if possible, though, since I'm only in one day a week and it's not always the same day.

Jim: How long after you buy a story does it typically reach print?

stanleyschmidt44: Not less than 5 months, because of the nature of our production process, but hardly ever more than a year.

Jim: Is the decline of the magazine circulation a serious concern? What is your current circulation? What measures are publishers taking to address this issue?

stanleyschmidt44: It's definitely a concern, though not as grave as it might seem. Our current circulation is something like 60,000; it once hit 110,000 - but many of those were unprofitable "stamp sheet" subscriptions. We're definitely looking for ways to sell more magazines. Two that we've had some success with are booth sales at the Worldcon, and sales via our website (analogsf.com).

ChuckM: What kind of niche markets do you try to advertise to? College bookstores, etc.?

stanleyschmidt44: College bookstores are one of the best, but we've found them surprisingly hard to get into. Another thing we'd like to do, but found hard to implement, is getting the magazines displayed with SF books rather than general magazines in places like Barnes & Noble. If anybody has ideas on how to make these things happen, we're interested!

Carolyn: What kind of trends do you see in science fiction, especially in Analog?

cmckit: (Chuck M. suggests asking your readers to ask the bookstores to convince them to put the magazines with the books: a task force of readers.)

stanleyschmidt44: Interesting idea from Chuck M.; maybe we can try something with that.
I don't usually think in terms of trends, but (not surprisingly) a lot of what people are writing these days has to do with biotechnology and nanotechnology. A few years ago (as a French reviewer pointed out to me) we had a considerable increase in women authors. And of course we're seeing lots of 9/11-inspired stories (but not publishing very many of them).

Jim: Judith Berman recently commented on the decline of optimistic science fiction, saying that stories now address failures rather than successes. Is this part of the turn off for new readers?

stanleyschmidt44: Yes, I think so. It began bothering me with a lot of what I was seeing back in the late 60s and 70s. I think I may be seeing a hint of a turnaround in that, at least among some of our authors (who have probably always tended to be more optimistic than many others). I often tell writers it's painfully easy to imagine ugly, depressing futures; it's harder, but far more worthwhile and rewarding, to imagine ways to prevent or fix them. In fact, I'd say it's an urgent need.

tmseay: There's recently been a debate online about women authors. Some editors seem to feel that a greater percentage of the stories by women coming through their slushpiles are publishable than those by men. Is this your experience, or have you noticed?

stanleyschmidt44: I try to avoid describing stories as "publishable" or "unpublishable," and I don't really pay much attention to whether the stories I read are by men or women. But no, I haven't noticed any such correlation.

cmckit: From there, I think we've run out of general questions. As for specifics, have you had a chance to read the two stories Jim sent?

stanleyschmidt44: Yes. I really like Thomas's storytelling in SELF-DEFENSE, and it has a really intriguing set-up. It may well sell somewhere else, but I don't think it would go over well in Analog because the ending depends on somebody doing something illegal, immoral, and not really very smart purely for selfish gain, and our readers tend to get turned off by that sort of thing. They're also sticklers for factual accuracy and logical consistency, and I don't see, for example, why somebody would have to wait 200 years for a launch window to go to another star system. The facts that make some launch times good or bad for travel _within_ a solar system don't seem to apply.

stanleyschmidt44: I also like Madeleine's writing in QUESTIONS OF NECESSITY, but it seems to me that its strengths, and in fact its essence, lie in the character development and interactions. The speculative background seems to me too peripheral for our readers; you could tell something very much like the _essential_ story about emigrants leaving Europe around 1900. So many of our readers would see it as only marginally science fiction (and too bleak for their tastes).

stanleyschmidt44: However, even if a story is completely wrong for one magazine, that should never discourage you from sending it to others. Editors aren't evaluating absolute quality, but matching stories to their own quirky tastes and present needs. And even though neither of these stories strikes me as Analog's cup of tea, at least in its present form, I'm definitely interested in seeing more from both Thomas and Madeleine.

cmckit: Thanks! I find those really intriguing comments. On "Self-Defense," if the delay currently created by the launch window were caused instead by the time required to repair the ship, and if Justin's actions at the end were motivated by a desire to allow the alien to escape, do you think that would that change your readers' perceptions of the story?

stanleyschmidt44: It might, though you should at least hint at a reason why a repair on such a small thing should take 200 years. Also, do you really need that long a delay?

stanleyschmidt44: And for that ending to work, at least for me, you'd need to make me feel more strongly than I do that letting the alien escape warrants taking a human life - or, probably better, let Justin find a way to let him escape _without_ killing Evan.

cmckit: On Madeleine's story, if the ending focus were on the hope from the new plants and the upcoming launch, would that change your perception?

stanleyschmidt44: I don't think that's my problem; the ending as it stands was my favorite part of the story. But if I picked the story up and started reading, I'm not sure I would choose to stay with it through all that unrelenting depressing that comes before, and if I didn't, I'd never see the good ending. You've got to hook me early, and keep me on the line.

stanleyschmidt44: It can be done, even for me reading a story about a very dark situation. (I've even written a couple of those myself.) Ted Sturgeon did it in THUNDER AND ROSES, but then Ted was a _very_ good writer and I don't think many could have pulledf off what he did there.

Madeleine: What particularly is depressing in this story to you?

stanleyschmidt44: I don't it's any particular thing so much as the overall flavor - the whole feeling is that this is one of those cases (of which I've read more than any normal person would ever have to) where the whole world has fallen apart and turned into a dreary, hopeless place.

cmckit: If Madeleine and Thomas have their hearts set on being published in Analog, would you suggest they spend their time revising these stories for you, or working on new material?

stanleyschmidt44: I would suggest sending these stories elsewhere and sending me something new. These may be just right somewhere else - Asimov's, for instance - and I would not want to see a writer twist a story into something very different from what he or she wants it to be just to sell it to me.

stanleyschmidt44: If they don't sell elsewhere, _then_ they might want to think about revising them so both they and I would be at least as happy with them. General advice: Always listen to any suggestions you get from an editor, act on the ones you can agree with, and don't act on any you can't agree with.

Larry: How do you feel toward publishing stories with more mature protagonists?

stanleyschmidt44: By that, does he mean what in less PC days would have been called old folks? No problem! See Mike Moscoe's "The Job Interview" in our May issue. (In my own new novel, _Argonaut_, two of the three protagonists are over 60, and one is over 100 [though she looks younger, like 85].)

Larry: After reading Jim's book on writing SF, what other books on writing would you suggest we read?

stanleyschmidt44: WRITING SCIENCE FICTION AND FANTASY, compiled by the editors of Asimov's and Analog (so I suppose I'm obviously biased). Also, Ben Bova edited a series of in-depth books on various aspects for Writer's Digest Books. (LIST FOLLOWS)

stanleyschmidt44: Steve Gillett did one on WORLD-BUILDING, I did ALIENS AND ALIEN SOCIETIES, Ben did SPACE TRAVEL, and Paul Nahin did TIME TRAVEL.

ChuckH: How do you seriously recognize humankind's problems and still write an optimistic story?

stanleyschmidt44: Maybe optimistic isn't the right word. Actually, I've never liked it because "optimistic" seems to imply a belief that things _will_ get better. The attitude I'm looking for is only that things _can_ get better, and we'd better figure out how. If you can't believe that, how can you go on at all? Also, please bear in mind that humankind has _always_ had problems, and has often thought the current set were so bad that the End must surely be near.

Jim: Do you get more publishable stories than you can publish?

stanleyschmidt44: Sometimes. It's been happening lately. That's the thing about a magazine: I have to publish an almost exactly fixed number of pages every issue, whether I have nothing I'm wild about or so much that I wish I had five magazines!

cmckit: Jim Gunn and all of his students thank you for all your thoughtful and encouraging comments. They've been the highlight of our session, and we're grateful that you've given so much of your time to us.

tmseay: Thanks so much! This really has made me feel more comfortable with the reading process at Analog.
[Ditto from Madeleine, and everyone else, of course.])

stanleyschmidt44: It's been a lot of fun for me, too. Thank you all for letting me "visit," and I look forward to reading some of your work!

- end transmission -

Related SF-Writing Workshops and Resources

"Science into Fiction" Spec-Fic Writing Workshops:
  Series 1: "The Higgs Boson in This Particular Universe"
  Series 2: "Creativity and the Brain"
  Series 3: "Writing in (and about) the Age of Artificial Intelligence"
  Series 4: "Six great stories and what makes them work: The science of SF writing"
  Series 5: "Hopepunk" coming Fall 2026: apply Summer 2026

Chris McKitterick's Spec-Fic Writing Workshop & Repeat Offenders Workshop

Kij Johnson & Barbara Webb's SF&F Novel Writing Workshops and Masterclasses

Speculative-fiction writing resources

Ad Astra Scholarships

AI policy

Donate

The Ad Astra Institute is a registered not-for-profit 501(c)3 educational, arts, and research organization. If you wish to support our activities by making a charitable donation to help others attend the workshops who might otherwise not be able to, contact McKitterick (cmckit.sf@gmail.com). We accept Zelle (use adastra.sf.institute@gmail.com to make a direct donation), PayPal (which takes an additional fee, or use "send to a friend"), and checks. We also partner with Farbeyond Books - a fantastic spec-fic bookstore - which donates at least 50% of all sales to Ad Astra, so if you have books you'd like to donate, let us know. Your donation may even be tax-deductible!

Thank you so much to our donors and supporters! You make all this possible.

Connect with Ad Astra

updated 8/27/2023