Elena talks with Mel and Cerid about their upcoming anthology projects outside of The Metaworker. They discuss how the projects got started, how they chose pieces to publish, and the process of editing those pieces into a book. They also discuss editor/author dynamics and the joys of creating the anthologies for their communities.
Referenced in this Episode:
River and Stone Anthology, edited by Mel Reynolds, is available to purchase!
- Buy River and Stone in print or Ebook on Amazon
- Buy River and Stone in print from Barnes & Noble
- Buy River and Stone Ebook from Barnes & Noble
Cerid’s project — Speculative Fiction New Zealand’s anthology, Artificial Sweetener — will be out later this year!
Episode Transcript:
Elena L. Perez (00:00:03):
Hello, everyone. My name is Elena Perez. I am the editor-in-chief of The Metaworker.
Melissa Reynolds (00:00:10):
And I’m Melissa Reynolds, also an editor with The Metaworker.
Cerid Jones (00:00:15):
And I’m Cerid Jones, the international editor here at The Metaworker
Elena L. Perez (00:00:19):
And today we are doing a very special podcast about putting together an anthology. So, Mel and Cerid have been working outside of The Metaworker on two different projects within their communities. I’m gonna talk to them today, asking them questions, picking their brains about what these projects are, what their roles are, and getting a little technical about the process, and having a good time. It might be two parts because we like to talk, so we hope you enjoy the conversation. And let’s get into it.
Cerid Jones (00:00:54):
Hello, and welcome to The Metaworker podcast. Before we get started with this episode, we did just want to take a moment to let you know that we did, in fact, record this back in July. Unfortunately, we’ve been so busy with our other projects that it took us a little bit longer to edit than we thought it would. So, please do bear this in mind as you’re listening.
Elena L. Perez (00:01:15):
We thought it would be fun to talk about ‘process’ and what they’ve learned for anyone who is curious about that kind of stuff. And for us to kind of compare notes because we just like to talk about this kind of stuff. So, yeah.
Melissa Reynolds (00:01:31):
The logistics of preparing a book or collection for publication is something that is popular with my writers group, as well, so I thought let’s have something we can share with other writers who may want to do the same. So, here we are.
Elena L. Perez (00:01:48):
Here we are, indeed. I’m gonna kind of be the moderator of this, so I’ll be asking Cerid and Mel questions to kind of pick their brains about what they’ve been up to. But first, we’re gonna give descriptions of the projects. So, to give a little background, for me, I’m not currently working on an anthology outside of The Metaworker, but I do have experience working on anthologies previously. So, when I was in college, I ran a couple (of) literary magazines there, so that was kind of similar, where, you know, we’d put out a call for submissions, we’d have a deadline where people had to submit their pieces by, and then we had a team who would review them. And then we chose the pieces, organized them into a book, and printed that book. I’m looking forward to comparing my experience with the experiences of Mel and Cerid. So, Mel and Cerid, go ahead and describe your projects and your roles in the projects.
Melissa Reynolds (00:02:47):
Well, first I wanna say thank you for talking with us, because you’re more experienced in this area than what I am, so I am looking forward to hearing maybe some wisdom and insights from you as well.
Elena L. Perez (00:03:00):
Aww.
Melissa Reynolds (00:03:00):
And also, I guess I went ahead and opened my big mouth, so I’ll go first. My project is a very long one. With my writers group, we started many years ago doing these projects geared towards expanding our writing horizons. What it basically comes down to is most of the writers in my writers group all write fantasy or science fiction. There’s some horror writers in there, but for the most part, it’s a lot of science fiction and fantasy. So we thought, ‘Hey, let’s push ourselves and try steam punk or mystery or romance’. So, we put the genres in a hat, drew them out randomly, and what you got is what you would research and then try to write. And our former leader, George Lies, he loved these contests so much that he decided, ‘Hey, let’s do something with them instead of letting them rot on our hard drives’. So, the anthology project was born and he pulled me into it and said, ‘Hey, go through these fifty-some stories and rate them as you are for your magazine’. At the time, I was with Everyday Fiction. So, I kind of got in on the editing part really quick, but then, sadly, George passed away this past year and the project was never finished. So, in his honor, Patty, the new writers group leader, and myself have decided to finish what was started so long ago. So, that’s my project in a nutshell.
Cerid Jones (00:04:46):
I think that’s such a beautiful story, Mel. Like, there’s so much in that. Not only is it a community project, but it’s also kind of a legacy, me-mo…
Melissa Reynolds (00:04:58):
At first, I thought ‘memento’…
All (00:04:59):
(laugh)
Melissa Reynolds (00:04:59):
But ‘memorial’…
Cerid Jones (00:05:01):
Yeah, memoriam. Yeah, memorial.
Melissa Reynolds (00:05:02):
Yeah, there we go.
Cerid Jones (00:05:03):
Memorial. Yeah, memoriam. Yeah, that’s it. We get there eventually—group of writers (and) we can’t even think of a word. Um, but no, I think that’s such a powerful and beautiful thing to have. And such a strong community feel. I just really take my hat off to that. I think that’s such a gorgeous project to be involved in, and there is so much heart involved. Okay, so my project is little bit similar, but also very different. So, I’m on the committee for a New Zealand organization called SpecFic New Zealand (SpecFicNZ). They’re an association of creators and writers and editors of fantasy and science fiction, horror—anything that fits in that speculative banner. The organization has been around since about 2010, I think, and a few years ago they initiated a biannual anthology. So, I’ve only been on the SpecFic team for about a year and a half, maybe two years. It might be two years, now. I missed out. I didn’t work on the last anthology project, but this time it’s come around and I put my hand up to be involved in working on that. Because I come from a publishing background, I’ve spent, like, four and a bit years—I think it’s nearly five years now—in the indie publishing scene, so I was really excited to get to kind of give back to the community of SpecFic and hopefully bring in some of my experience and skills into working on an anthology. I have never worked on a collaborative anthology before. I’ve worked on collections all by the same author, so I’m aware of, you know, getting ordering and things like that sorted. But I’ve never worked with a whole bunch of different authors coming up with a collective anthology, so that part is really new to me, which is very exciting.
So, we are in a very different stage to where Mel is at. We have only just yesterday sent out the acceptances, rejections, and conditionals for the anthology, so we’re in the very early stages. We have a sort of finite deadline for it and are working in a team, much like Mel is working in a team. So, we have two volunteer editors who have put their hand up to help us out, and then there are two of the core committee members who are sort of cheerleading it, and we had a guest submission editor come in. So, we are working with a whole bunch of different people in our proofreading department. We’re gonna have another couple of editors come in and another couple of core members. So, there’s sort of a team. I think in the end it’ll be about seven or eight different people who are involved in different parts of the process, so very collaborative and also very much working for a community organization. (The) process for the anthology is it’s themed, so this year’s theme, this biannual year’s theme, is “artificial sweetener”, stories of AI a hundred percent human-made. So, that was the theme that got sent out and so people sent in stories that were based on that theme. It’s only members who can submit, so that’s where it’s kind of a little bit similar to Mel in that she’s working with just the writers group, and we’re working with just our members. And then, yeah, collating and putting that together from there.
Elena L. Perez (00:08:50):
So, Cerid, I am just curious. You said that it’s a bunch of different people on this team that you’re working with, so is it you who’s actually leading that? Kind of delegating all these different things, like who you need to do what, or is it more ‘heads of department’, where you’re all…heads of each department where you’re all working together and, kind of, you have weekly meetings or…describe that process a little bit.
Cerid Jones (00:09:20):
So, the core is the committee of SpecFic and there’s about sort of seven or eight of us. There might be nine. I’m very bad with numbers today. I could list off all the names. I probably should count them all. Anyway, inside the core, we all kind of do different bits and pieces here and there. It’s very collaborative, but yes, I am heading the project. However, there are a lot of other people involved, too. So, our president, she was the one who organized the—all our submissions are blind, so she organized the blind submissions. She was running the email account that people submitted to, and then she collated all of those into, um, removing all the details and uploading those as just the pure submission files. So, Gary (Nelson) and I are working together as sort of the primary heads of the anthology, so it’s very collaborative. Gary has worked on the previous anthology with SpecFic New Zealand. He’s already had experience doing that, and I haven’t done that, but I’ve come in with my own sort of set of experiences and sort of rocking the boat a little bit (laughs), as I do, and changing a few things up.
So, at the moment, most of what we are talking about kind of goes through in an email process. The entire core meets once a month to discuss what’s going on in all our different avenues and kind of come together and sort of pool/share. Um, so there isn’t…Gary and I are collaborating on it and it’s not that we necessarily have very specific roles. We kind of have a chat, work out what strengths are where, and kind of are working everything out as we go, especially because I’ve thrown some curve balls in about changing a few of the systems that they’d used in previous years. So, it’s not as definitive, which has its pros and its cons (laughs) in lots of ways. But so far it’s working pretty good. When we were doing the submissions rounds, we were—you know, we had some deadlines (and) we ended up meeting I think, like, three weeks in a row once we’d all read the pieces so that the submissions team, which was myself, Gary, and one other, we could chat about the works and then, you know, work out what we were saying yes to and what we were having to reject to fit in with the constraints. So, the other important thing to mention is the fact that we do pay our writers. So if you’re accepted, there is a payment.
Elena L. Perez (00:12:15):
I wanna jump to Mel to ask about how your team looks like. Are you the head and kind of delegating? Are you and Patty? Or how does that work?
Melissa Reynolds (00:12:26):
Essentially, it started with just me and George because he’s done anthologies before. We were doing contests, and I was in undergrad at the time, so it was finished for the most part. And then I went to grad school and it fell apart because I was the driving force to keep things going.
Elena L. Perez (00:12:48):
Mm-hmm.
Melissa Reynolds (00:12:48):
So, now it’s pretty much me because Patty has said, ‘it’s your baby, you talked to George the most. I was not involved at all’. So, we meet maybe once a month at a cafe and have coffee and talk about everything. So, she’s doing her best to help me out with ‘first pass’ edits. She is gathering the bios of the authors, which surprisingly can be a bit difficult.
Elena L. Perez (00:13:22):
(laughs).
Melissa Reynolds (00:13:22):
And then, you know, she’s kind of like the organizational type that’s driving everything because I’ve gotten to the point where I am juggling work, Metaworker, and I’m trying to do the anthology…
Elena L. Perez (00:13:35):
Mm-hmm.
Melissa Reynolds (00:13:37):
…in my spare time. Plus, it’s summer, so my kids all want to do things. Uh, so (laughs)
Cerid Jones (00:13:42):
And your own writing, of course.
Melissa Reynolds (00:13:44):
(laughs) Yeah.
All (00:13:44):
(laugh).
Melissa Reynolds (00:13:45):
Yeah, Yeah, that too. That too.
Elena L. Perez (00:13:48):
Let’s just keep adding things. (laughs)
Melissa Reynolds (00:13:51):
Yeah, so it’s pretty much just me at this point. Well, I take that back. Patty has been pretty good about, you know, keeping motivation up. Like, meeting at the cafe in the morning to talk with her about it, not only do I feel like I’ve gotten to know her better, but it gives me this, ‘Hey, I need to have this, this, this, and this done by the time I go meet to talk with Patty about all this’. So, it builds in some deadlines that’s really helpful. Once we get past this next stage, she’s more experienced on the marketing side. Because she has quite a few novels out already, she’s gonna take more of a leadership role at that point. But for right now, I’m doing the editing, the formatting, and the book cover, so—whew, I’m busy. (laughs) But in a good way.
Elena L. Perez (00:14:53):
(laughs) That’s a lot. Yeah, it sounds fun. So, both of you definitely have very different teams. So, it sounds like, Mel, you have a lot of control over how things are gonna go, you know, what pieces you choose and all that. And, Cerid, it sounds like you are kind of—you have a team of people coming together and choosing all that. So, I mean, this kind of leads into my my next question for you, Cerid, which you touched on a little bit. You did mention that you kind of introduced some new things, a new way of doing things, because you haven’t done this before, but you said Gary has done this before? So, how has that dynamic been?
Cerid Jones (00:15:38):
It’s interesting. Um, you know, I think because…I mean, we—Mel and I—are very similar, even though our systems are so different. These both are community projects, you know? SpecFic is entirely a volunteer-run organization. So, you know, every year that they’ve done this, it is just the core members trying to come together to do something to give back to our society that we are involved in. And our community of speculative authors, science fiction and fantasy, is quite big here, but it’s not…like, there are very few awards for speculative authors. There are very few opportunities. We don’t have a lot of publishing roots here in New Zealand specifically for specfic. It’s very kind of underground and looked over. New Zealand’s very big on literary fiction. So, we are working with the community and trying to break through (laughs) some sort of market, genre, whatever you wanna call it, (and) get some more recognition for our wonderfully talented people. So, it is very much a bunch of people coming together, trying to work out how to do things for a community effort. The major kind of difference is, like I say, I’ve come from working for an indie publishing house for a number of years and being very involved in that and also here at The Metaworker, you know, how we’ve dealt with our submission process and the systems that we’ve put in place. And we’ve come a long way getting that sort of fine-tuned.
Elena L. Perez (00:17:20):
Mm-hmm.
Cerid Jones (00:17:21):
And it’s still a work in progress, of course. ‘Cause it always is. I don’t think you ever put a 100% nail on the head, but those are some of the things that I’ve brought into my involvement in this anthology. Because right now, I mean, we’ve only just finished the submissions wave, so it’s early (laughs) in lots of ways, shapes, or forms. But I did, I mean, I initiated using some of the stuff that we’ve talked about and how we assessed pieces for The Metaworker, to try and help make some systems and some formulas that include things about publishing standards and craft commentary things on a deeper level. Rather than just looking at a story and going, you know, ‘do we like this, is this what we can consider good’, trying to break down what those biases might be. And because we do it blind, I think that’s really important. The specfic is all blind, so we do not know who the authors are. And because it’s such a small community in so many ways, there is this kind of tentative awkwardness in and around when you’re assessing a piece of work. The chances are that those people on the core are going to know who those authors are. They might even be personally friends with them. So, you know, really trying to get rid of those biases can be tricky in any situation, but especially when you work in (the) community. And I’m sure Mel will have a lot to say about that, too, because that’s probably somewhere where we align quite closely on…
Melissa Reynolds (00:18:54):
Yeah, absolutely.
Cerid Jones (00:18:55):
On the challenge (laughs) of working in this kind of framework.
Elena L. Perez (00:19:00):
Yeah. (laughs) How was it for you, Mel? Because your submissions are not blind and you know all the authors that you’re gonna put in this anthology. So, talk about that process a little bit.
Melissa Reynolds (00:19:12):
That was really a difficult one because I want to support and encourage all the writers in my group, because I think that they’re all wonderful people and I love the thought that, for some of them, this will be their first publication. So, I love the idea that this anthology not only honors George, but it can maybe boost the writer’s confidence going out to submit to other places. They can be like, ‘oh yeah, I already have a a piece published, so of course I’m just gonna go ahead and hit that submit button’. So, that’s what’s foremost in my mind.
But in the first round, George gathered together, I think it was six different contests’ worth of stories, and each one at the time probably had fifteen stories, maybe more or less depending on who all was able to participate that time. And he said, “Go through and rank these as though they’ve been submitted to Everyday Fiction. Be honest. Frame it as, ‘would Everyday Fiction publish this piece’?” And that took a little pressure off. And then I also knew I had George, the leader of the group, there to either confirm or deny. You know, he had a vote, too. So, that time felt a little different because, once he passed, it became more about asking former writers group members and new members to contribute. I gave them the opportunity, I reached out to all the new members and I said, ‘Hey, we’re finishing this. Would you like to have a story in this to honor George’ type of thing. So, I think I ended up with around fifteen new stories from that call.
Honestly, everyone brought the fire and I didn’t have to reject anyone. There are a couple (of) people that—I knew their strengths as a writer because I have known them for years and years—so, one in particular, I asked her to write a specific story for the anthology. I said, ‘Hey, we’re a little light on the nature and farm life type of thing. Can you please write this for me? Because I know you’ll do a great job at it’. So, that makes it even easier when you’re giving them the topic and the goal and actually asking for it rather than, ‘Hey, just send me whatever you want’. That helps a lot too.
Elena L. Perez (00:22:01):
That’s kind of how anthologies—you know, professionally published (ones)—do it, too. Sometimes they will approach the authors to write a specific piece. So, that’s really cool, to be able to have that kind of knowledge of the author’s strengths like that and have them deliver and be blown away by what they write.
Melissa Reynolds (00:22:21):
You know, what Cerid was saying about it being a little bit nerve wracking? Even though I had George to back me the first time, and now this time kind of his memory and everyone wanting to turn in their best work to honor him is a big factor, I believe. I still was nervous giving edits because I don’t wanna discourage anyone, but I also wanted it to be, like Cerid was mentioning, up to industry standards. So, it’s a tough balancing act.
Elena L. Perez (00:22:53):
Were you gonna say something, Cerid?
Cerid Jones (00:22:54):
I was just gonna add one point about being able to, like, know your community as well as you do, Mel. To be able to have just a little bit more control of that curating process. Being able to reach out—when you’re in the position as an anthology editor, and you are able to reach out to fill in gaps, to broaden and shape a whole work, there’s a beautiful level of creative contr—i don’t wanna use the word ‘control’, but it kind of is (control) from a curative perspective, to really get a nice overarching arc and a nice overarching balance of works. I really appreciate that. I’m sort of envious of your ability to be able to do that. I hope to be able to have the option to do that because constructing—I know we’re gonna get onto this later but I just think it’s a good leap point, you know—constructing a collection of work is a real challenge.
Melissa Reynolds (00:23:56):
Yes.
Cerid Jones (00:23:57):
And having that flexibility to be able to go, ‘Hey, could you write this thing for me’ Is just so lovely. And it’s also really empowering for your community too, you know, to be specifically asked to write a piece to fit into this anthology. I think there’s kind of a ‘brush the shoulder off’, like, ‘oh yeah, I could do that for you’. (laughs) Like, just really cool. I like that.
Elena L. Perez (00:24:21):
(laughs) Exactly. That is.
Melissa Reynolds (00:24:24):
Oh, real quick. I’m glad that you brought that aspect up, Cerid. Because this was a ‘stretch our horizons’ type of contest that we started, it also turned into…we all knew each other’s writing so well that we could recognize who wrote it just by reading it through. So, we added to the challenge, ‘Hey, we’ll take off the names and the person who can guess who wrote this will win a prize’, which was cookies or something like that. So, it came to the point where we started writing like each other. One of our group members, Jenna, she is a master at mimicking other people, so she fooled a whole bunch of us. The point of telling you all that is that means that the theme for this anthology was all over the place, and we had all the different genres. So, it was really difficult. George and I spent hours talking on the phone trying to figure out our theme and how to organize the stories so that it made sense. It was April and Char who wrote pieces specifically for the anthology, having them help fill in those gaps was so amazingly helpful. It really was.
Elena L. Perez (00:25:43):
Mm-hmm. That’s awesome. That ties in really nicely to my next question about—well, Cerid, you already kind of talked about it, but having control to mold the vibe of the whole anthology. Mel, you mentioned talking with George about deciding which order to put these pieces in and then filling in the gaps with these authors that you know really well. So, can you talk a little bit about that? Like, you know, if you have maybe funny pieces or sad pieces or, like in your case, Mel, completely different genres, how did you decide—we’ll give you a chance to answer too, Cerid—but Mel, how did you decide the order? What was your thought process behind that?
Melissa Reynolds (00:26:27):
I have conflicted feelings about this, but the title of the anthology is “River and Stone” and George picked it from one of my stories. So, I felt very weird about it because I’m like, ‘uh, what me?’ (laughs) But once we had the title, George said…one of us, I don’t know, but we decided we were gonna break it into sections and tie it into the river. So, one is called “Curling Ripples” that George picked, and another one’s “Overhanging Stone” ’cause you know how a river can eat away at the bank and leave a big over overhang?
Elena L. Perez (00:27:07):
Mmm.
Melissa Reynolds (00:27:08):
So, pieces that are thrillers or have some kind of big thing hanging over the story would go there. Or, my favorite is “Tributaries” which is, you know, the start of the river that feeds it.
Elena L. Perez (00:27:22):
Mm.
Melissa Reynolds (00:27:23):
So, that’s where I put romance because it’s the start of something new that’s going to feed through the rest of this couple’s life.
Elena L. Perez (00:27:31):
Aw.
Melissa Reynolds (00:27:32):
So, I kind of ignored the genre itself and tried to pick out what the heart of the story was and how it could relate to these different phases of the river.
Elena L. Perez (00:27:45):
Oh, I really like that through line. That’s really cool, too, because it makes the reader think, you know, why are these stories grouped together? I like your method of kind of getting to the heart of each piece. That’s really cool.
Melissa Reynolds (00:27:57):
Thank you.
Cerid Jones (00:27:58):
Yeah, that’s beautiful. And I love the titles that you’ve chosen for each of your chapters. Like, you’re really thinking about the emotive experience…
Elena L. Perez (00:28:08):
Mm-hmm.
Cerid Jones (00:28:08):
…of a reader as well as the journey of these pieces. That’s so profound and gorgeous and I love that, Mel. Well done. Hat’s off to you.
Elena L. Perez (00:28:20):
(laughs)
Melissa Reynolds (00:28:20):
Well, and hats off to George, too, because like I said, this was definitely—I don’t know how many phone conversations I’ve had with him (laughs) about this anthology. And that was…it’s hard to remember ’cause it’s been quite a while since we set that in place. But, we were bouncing ideas off of each other and I have to give credit to George because he’s the one that’s like, ‘what happens in the story is better for grouping than the genre itself’, if that makes sense. So, hats off to George.
Elena L. Perez (00:28:52):
Mm-hmm. Yeah. Yeah, that would’ve presented a challenge for me for sure, figuring out, because you’ve got so many different genres, but that’s really smart to find the core idea and do it that way. I like that. And it gives the reader variety too, so you’re not reading, you know, all the romances necessarily, or, you know, all the sci-fi necessarily. So yeah, that’s really smart. How about you, Cerid, how did you decide, or, well, I guess you’re not really in that process yet, you said, but how do you think you’re (laughs) gonna tackle that? What are your thoughts? (laughs)
Cerid Jones (00:29:32):
Well, I think, I mean, from hearing Mel’s description of how she’s gone about it, I think one point to make really clear is that this is such an ongoing process. I think as much as it’s challenging to pick pieces, the real challenge happens when you’re actually starting to curate all these pieces together and get an experience for the reader. Even in your own individual pieces of short fiction or poetry, you want an arc, right? You want the same thing in a collection of works. You want to have this arc, these ebbs and flows, so that a reader can journey through it without feeling disjointed or smacked in the face by something that they don’t, you know, anticipate. There has to be a feel that keeps them going through. And that’s super challenging when you’re dealing with different authors who are writing in different genres with different styles and radically different themes. Even in our collection, we had a call-out theme. Our theme was “artificial sweetener”, so all our pieces had to have something to do with AI, but that was it. That’s actually quite a broad description when you stop and think about it. So, while the vast majority of the works that we’ve got in are sort of dystopian or futurology, we’ve got a little bit of sci-fi, we’ve got a piece or two that maybe touches on a little bit of fantasy-esque kind of stuff. But it’s more closely linked to that urban science fiction or futurology. We’ve got a thriller-ish kind of piece. We’ve got some cozy pieces in there. So, we’ve got quite a diversity.
We’ve only just hit and we’re about to start our editing phase now, but while we’ve been going through and selecting the submissions pieces, I’ve been thinking, personally, about how I might curate these pieces. ‘Cause that, for me, was part of my process in some of the selection criteria. Just in the back of my head. That’s not to say that I rejected any pieces because they didn’t fit what my idea of the overall arc might have been, but getting that kind of feel of some of the synergy of how these pieces are gonna sort of flow together was just always in the back of my mind. I’m thinking, I will hopefully get to have a good chat to Gary and the rest of the core team about, is doing something similar to what Mel’s talking about and having definitive sections that we can try and bulk pieces of work together. The way I’m seeing it so far is we’ve got a lot of stories that are from more of an introspective ‘inside the AI kind of mind’ of stuff, and then we’ve got a lot of stuff that’s sort of the conceptual story worldbuilding side of AI, and then a few pieces that sort of slip in between somewhere. So, my brain is sort of trying to think of it in these three different blocks, but I don’t know how that’s going to end up in the final curation of the works or what the overall arc will end up looking like. But I think the easiest way to do it is exactly the same kind of thing that Mel is talking about. Separating it into blocks and then trying to navigate so many pieces in each of those blocks. I think we have about thirty—oh, gods, I should probably actually look how many pieces. We’ve got roughly thirty pieces in there, all from different authors. And we have, same as Mel, we’ve got some poetry, we’ve got some shorter fiction, and some longer fiction. Our word cap limit was 5,000 words, so nothing over 5,000 words. Yeah, trying to get each section to flow. We know what our opening piece is going to be and what our closing piece is going to be. Those we decided pretty quickly on in the process, so we have a beginning and an end, and now it’s just getting the arc between those two points to work.
Elena L. Perez (00:33:59):
(laughs) Yeah, I find those are generally the easiest. You know you wanna start the anthology with a bang, or—that’s typically how my anthologies were—you wanna start it strong and then the ending…yeah, like you were saying, Cerid, you wanna leave the reader with something to take away from the anthology. So, those are typically, I’ve found, the easiest. And then it’s fitting in all the other ones. And then you reminded me that both of you have accepted poetry, so talk a little bit about the process for that. You’re still looking at the core of the poem. You also don’t want to, you know, have five poems right after the other, so how did you kind of fit that into your decision-making of the order?
Melissa Reynolds (00:34:49):
So, I have about forty—I just counted when Cerid said, “I need to count”. So, I have about forty-six, somewhere in that area, and then I have about five different sections. I’ve tried to, like you said, look at the core of the poem and figure out what the overall theme or connection could be. So, I’m looking at the first section right now, and it’s called “Mountain Streams”, and there’s a lot in that section about identity. We have mine in there, “River and Stone”, but then we also have one by Jenna, it’s about a woman who is losing her sight and is going blind and about navigating what her life is gonna look like. So, when I got a poem called “Identity”, I’m, like, ‘this is perfect, I’ll put it in with these other stories’. That’s kind of what I’m going by, what’s the feel that comes with this poem, and where would it fit best? I have one section that’s called “Wildlife” because we had a couple (of) stories that were—one was written from the point of view of a cat and the other one had talking chipmunks in it, by Janice, which is amazing. (laughs) But George…and I was, like, ‘how, how are we gonna fit this in with the river’? And George is, like, ‘I got it. “Wildlife by the river”‘. (laughs) So, when I got a poem about hunting, I’m, like, ‘okay, right with the wildlife. There we go’. (laughs)
Elena L. Perez (00:36:38):
(laughs) That’s what I was gonna ask next. I remember when I was putting my anthologies together, there were a couple pieces that kind of were the odd ones out. Like, they didn’t neatly fit into any kind of category, so we ended up kind of trying to…we wanted to make sure that the pieces still stood out because they were really good pieces, but we also didn’t want to bury them between, you know, two pieces that just wouldn’t have done that one justice. That was gonna be my question, kind of how do you deal with the odd pieces out? But, I like that. You kind of created your own new section that made it fit and still allowed it to shine in its own right.
Melissa Reynolds (00:37:33):
Yeah. That’s why these headings have been a lifesaver. The “Tributary” ones, that’s my favorite, probably because it’s the one I came up with. (laughs) For sure.
Elena L. Perez (00:37:49):
(laughs) That’s a great one.
Melissa Reynolds (00:37:52):
You know, that guiding or that, ‘hey, this section is going to be about life changes and that is “Whitewater Rapids”‘, that makes it easy to identify it in the story itself. So, I’m betting, Cerid, once you figure out what your sections could possibly be, I would take extra time and do that because then everything else will fall in place below that.
Cerid Jones (00:38:19):
Yeah, absolutely. I think you’re dead onto it with that. I think, for me, we had a lot less—I’m actually a little bit sad about how many poetry submissions we got for our AI call. We only ended up with about three or four, and only one of them has made the cut. So, we’re only gonna have one poem in collection of—and I just counted—nineteen, we have nineteen pieces, which I hope I got right, ’cause I did count from one sheet. But nevertheless. Anyway, we’ve only got one poem and fitting that somewhere is going to be interesting, to see where that’s going to go and how that fits in with the story. But yeah, I wish there had been more, I think the theme of AI and poetry could be really interesting, but we are not in control. This is, again, I’m really jealous of Mel’s, you know, ability to be able to just go to her community and be like, ‘Hey, could you write this thing’? I so wish I could have just gone to some people in the community and been like, ‘Hey, could you just send us…’ Like, it’d be really nice to have three poems. If we’re gonna have three sections, can we have a poem in each of them? But we can only work with what we get, you know, sent in a submission.
Elena L. Perez (00:39:38):
Right? Yeah. Yeah, it depends on the nature of the anthology. Mine was the same. I didn’t get to choose, like go to people, because they were students from the entire campus and I didn’t know everybody in the entire campus. So, kind of in a similar boat as you, Cerid, with mine. (laughs) So, I wanna talk a little bit about, uh, we discussed it briefly before, but about editing the pieces themselves. So, once you’ve chosen the pieces, how do you go about editing the piece with the authors? Mel, you know the authors, so you can talk a little bit about how that dynamic is knowing the person and giving them feedback. And, Cerid, I don’t think you know all the authors, I guess talk about how that may be different or similar.
Cerid Jones (00:40:28):
I think one of the things that is really interesting, ’cause we’re about to start the editing phase, so this kind of ties in a little bit with some of the other things that we’ve kind of talked about. One of the changes that I’ve brought in, being on the anthology this year is that, I mean, I am an editor by trade. I’m trying to work as a freelance professional editor at the moment. Whereas the community that I’m working with, there’s no one on the team who is a professional editor and, as far as I’m aware, there haven’t been in the anthology collections previously. So, they’ve mostly just dealt with straight up acceptances or rejections and one of the things that I found when I was looking through the submissions is going, ‘I’d actually really like to work on this piece. Like, these are some of the downfalls, but they’re not that difficult to just bring up to that next level’. So, I’d like to do developmental editing—that’s my area of editing—to work on some of these pieces. And that’s how we’ve ended up, for the first time, at SpecFic, having conditional acceptances.
And one of the beautiful things is that those letters—like just today, those acceptances have been sent out yesterday and my email is getting flooded through with these handful of conditional edit pieces saying, ‘yes, I’d love to work with an editor’. And I’m just so excited about that ’cause I was holding my breath going, ‘oh no, am I stepping on some toes here by making some conditionals’? And what if the authors come back and say, ‘no, how dare you’? You know, like, ‘my piece is fine’. Then it creates this whole awkward thing because our community members do, I mean, I think the vast majority of them know each other. I’m still very new to the speculative community. I mean, I have been going out to as many events as I can and getting to know these people. I am searching heaps more, like ever since I’ve been a part of SpecFic, getting to recognize who the science fiction and fantasy—mostly fantasy ’cause that’s my area—authors are. I am getting a familiarity and, after having met some of the authors at some events that I’ve been to in the last little while, I could get a guess to some of these. Once we’d already gone through the acceptance and rejection stuff— we’d already made our decision—I then actually had been to an event and I re-went through our list and kind of went, ‘oh, I think that person might be that author’. I’m not 100% sure, by any means, and I still don’t know, but that was really interesting for me. Whereas Gary has been a part of this community for a really long time, he’s really familiar with a lot of these people, and he actually sent me an email today to sort of say, ‘you know, it’s really interesting having now looked at our list from the blind and recognizing a bunch of names’. And he sort of said, ‘oh, I’m feeling a bit, I don’t know about that’. Like, (laughs) I’m presuming that he’s seen some names that, you know, some pieces that might not have made the cut and kind of been surprised that they didn’t make the cut when, you know, he’s familiar with that author and that author’s work. So, I think that’s a really interesting kind of point. And now we are moving on to the editing process.
These are all, most of them, the vast majority of them, are established in some way, shape, or form, authors in New Zealand. Some of them may be traditionally published and some may be self-published. That’s a really big thing in the speculative community here. Like I said before, it’s really hard to get a traditional publishing deal as a speculative author in this country, so the vast majority of them do self-publishing. I don’t know any of these people very well, so it’s going to be a really interesting process for me, cheerleading the developmental edit portions, working with some of these authors, because I’m not sure what level of editing relationships they may have had before. I don’t know if they’ve been published in SpecFic before, because previously the only thing SpecFic did was just light copy edits, light line edits and serious proofreading, whereas now we are doing a developmental story edit, you know? Then we’re gonna pass on to a different person to do some line editing, and then a different person again will do line and copy edit, and then a different person again will do the proofreading. So, we are getting that proper system of the staggered editing process to ensure each of these pieces are as polished as humanly possible for this collection.
It’s all new territory in this framework for me. And I am nervous. I am really nervous, even though I work as a professional editor, I haven’t worked in this kind of stratosphere before where this is a community project. This isn’t—I’m not a publisher right now. I am, you know, a member of SpecFic. I’m working on a community project, and I have this constant kind of questioning of myself, of what kind of authority do I have here? When I was working as a publisher, I knew my authority because it’s the publishing company, you know, like what we say is what we’re gonna work with. You have that. Whereas this is a totally different power dynamic and I am tentative. I absolutely have to admit that I’m really tentative in how I’m going to go through this. And also working with a team. Like I said before, we’ve got a team. Well, the editors that we’ve brought in, they’re not professional editors, either. You know, they’ve done some editing. One person in particular is really starting to try and launch her career as an editor, which is awesome, and I’m really looking forward to being able to give her an opportunity. But a lot of them haven’t worked as an editor in a publishing sphere before, so a lot of it is new. A lot of it is very different, and there’s a lot of kind of blurred lines and roles and dynamics that exist.
Melissa Reynolds (00:46:49):
For me, it’s been an evolution of me as an editor, really, because, as I mentioned, George started this while I was an undergrad, so I had a ton of audacity (laughs) when I first did the first round of edits. I would go in and I would mark up everything.
Elena L. Perez (00:47:11):
(laughs).
Melissa Reynolds (00:47:11):
And I would talk to the writer and I would say, ‘Hey, this is why I’m doing this’. Or I would ask questions or react to the, you know, almost like a ‘mega beta’ reading. I don’t know how to explain it, but, you know, it was like a mix of everything. It was developmental, it was line edits, everything.
Elena L. Perez (00:47:36):
Yeah. (laughs).
Melissa Reynolds (00:47:37):
And then most of the authors were really, really patient and several of them would say, ‘I don’t wanna change this, but yes to everything else’. So, I think, Cerid, that you’ll be okay even if you go full-on into the deep end of the audacity pool like I did as long as you’re willing to have that conversation and accept if an author disagrees with you. I think you’ll be fine. This last round, I’ve been through grad school, I’ve gained a lot of experience, I still did some pretty heavy edits. I did less on the developmental, partly because our word count is much lower. It’s like half of what Cerid has. Some of them are even as short as 600 words. So, for something that’s that short, there’s not as much need for the developmental side, you know. It’s more of a flash-in-the-pan, let’s focus on making sure that the feel is right. And personally, too, I’ve come on the side of, I want the writer to feel as though I am respecting their artistic vision for the piece, so if that means that a rule is going to be broken, a grammar rule, that is okay because I want the writer to feel comfortable with what we’re putting out in the world. At the end of the day, it’s their name on the byline and not mine. That’s where I’m coming from now is, ‘hey, I’m gonna give you the choice’. I don’t know who I told this to, it might’ve been you, Cerid. I’m not sure. But there’s one part that I was editing and I said, you know, ‘my job as an editor is to give you choices. Because if you are doing something and breaking a rule without knowing that you’re breaking the rule, then you’re not a rebel writer. But if you have the choice presented to you, and you make the choice to go ahead and break that rule, then you’re a rebel’.
Elena L. Perez (00:49:54):
Hmm.
Melissa Reynolds (00:49:54):
I’m just out here making a bunch of rebels, is the way I look at it. (laughs).
Cerid Jones (00:49:56):
Yeah. I love that. And yes, Mel, that was me. (laughs) 100%. And I think you touch on something really important. There is, in the stratosphere of the publishing industry, there are all these different spaces, you know? It is different being an editor as it is being a publisher. It’s different being a peer reviewer as it is being an editor, as it is being a publisher. There are different—I mean, I don’t wanna use the word rules, but there’s different expectations. As an editor, you’re 100% right, Mel, your job as an editor is to present suggestions, present ideas, to maintain the voice of the author, and just show that there are different options available and allow them to make that decision for themselves. ‘Cause that’s your job.100%.
As a publisher, your job is to ensure that your company, your organization that is putting this work out, is up to the standard (of) what your expectations are. And there are some definitive yeses and nos. You know, an author might say, ‘no, I really love this ending, how it is’. And you as a publisher are going, ‘actually, no, this doesn’t fit to what we think this should be’. Because there’s that gatekeeping part involved, yeah? So, you have control over doing that. As an editor, you have no right ever. You can say, ‘Hey, we think the ending might be better doing X, Y, and Z thing’, but you have no right to put that definitive down on something like that in any way, shape, or form. And I think it’s one of the things that we don’t kind of talk about enough in this industry is what those different roles are, what the different obligations of those roles are, and how to do them ethically and authentically so that we’re actually empowering the industry and the authors at the same time. Being able to back up every single one of your suggestions and your ideas and work collaboratively as an editor is of absolute paramount importance. And the author has to be aware that they always have the possibility of saying yes and saying no, you know, that it is in the author’s wheelhouse to do that. And they can even turn down a publishing contract if they don’t wanna change that ending. You know, like the author has the power at the end of the day.
Elena L. Perez (00:52:30):
Yeah.
Melissa Reynolds (00:52:30):
Agreed. Agreed. And, you know, that’s something we actually talked about in—I think it was in theory, I don’t know, but it was a theory class, but we were also talking about our role as an editor, and we had so many…a lot of great ideas from my fellow students. Like, ‘oh, I’m a bike repairman. I make sure that the story has wheels so the author can bike off into to great success’. And I think mine was something closer to, almost like a parent, where you say the rules, but you also are patient and recognize that there are things that are bigger than the rules, sometimes. Then you’re also a cheerleader and an encourager, and at the end of the day, you fade away into the background and let the author-slash-kid take all the credit. (laughs)
Elena L. Perez (00:53:27):
(laughs) That’s great. I like that analogy.
Cerid Jones (00:53:31):
Yeah, me too. I love that. So, I’m just curious, Mel, because you and I both have done a lot of editing stuff and we’ve worked together editing quite a bit, you know, I think we’re very competent in that. How did you grapple with…’cause you’re inadvertently sort of being put slightly in a publisher’s role, even though I understand that it’s different because this is for the community of the authors and you gave a beautiful premise about that earlier in this discussion. But having that kind of authority, you’ve been put in a bigger seat of authority than you would be used to just being an editor. Has that had any kind of weight on you? Have you sort of thought about that or you’ve just kind of been able to push that aside and just focus on the authors
Melissa Reynolds (00:54:22):
(laughs) Absolutely. It definitely is one of those things that I worry about because I don’t wanna overstep my bounds and be too pushy, but I also want to make sure that this is something that might actually do well. ‘Cause the last anthology that the writers put out, the writers group, was “Mist on the Mon”, and that was…George has a piece in there and I think it was towards the beginning days of the group, so probably twenty years ago, maybe. Here’s the thing, that did so well that the writers group bank account was able to support Christmas get togethers, pizza parties, stuff like that over the years. So, my hope is that, number one, we will recoup any costs that we incur. But also that, you know, it’s a gift that the past writers from the beginning of the contest up to the new writers who are contributing, it’s almost like it’s a gift.
Elena L. Perez (00:55:35):
Mmm.
Melissa Reynolds (00:55:35):
To keep the group going and maybe even support the next generation that comes in after us, you know? So, that definitely weighs pretty heavy on my mind. But that’s where I’m grateful for Patty, because she is also kind of stepping up on that front. She’s saying, you know, ‘we can take it, we’ll put it on this platform and it’ll go to the libraries and we’ll go here and there’. And, she’s, like, ‘we’ll set up readings from the Morgantown Public Library and one in Fairmont’. We’ll go to fairs, or she goes to fairs, and she’s gonna take the book with her to sell. So, she really has her finger on the marketing-slash-more of the publishing side. So, I feel like I’m learning, from her, a good bit in this section. And then, you know, when there’s two of you backing each other up, it’s a little different than just me saying, ‘too bad, guys, suck it up’, you know? (laughs).
Elena L. Perez (00:56:41):
(laughs)
Melissa Reynolds (00:56:42):
But yeah, I’m glad you brought that up ’cause it’s definitely one of those things where I worry that—it’s so tough. I’m sure you all know and have tried to submit your own work and how it can be really tough. You can get lots of rejections before you get your first acceptance. So, I am looking at this little nest of beautiful, wonderful stories that I have, and I’m looking at what’s waiting for it. I’m like, ‘please don’t crush this. Just, just let it fly’, you know?. (laughs) The writers have all been great about working with me, with my edits, and accepting a majority of them or saying, ‘okay, can we do this instead’? And usually ends up—I find when a writer says ‘yes, but no’ and they come up with another solution, it usually ends up being the strongest and better than what I could have thought of, so that helps that anxiety and stress, for sure. The authors being so wonderful and being willing to just roll with the punches. And then, just knowing that even if we break even, we still did a good thing. (laughs).
Elena L. Perez (00:58:02):
(laughs) Yeah, I know what you’re talking about too, Cerid, about, you know, putting together something like this, it’s a huge responsibility because all of these people are trusting their work in your hands, to present their work in the best light, like Mel was saying. We want to make their story better, elevate it. Kind of mutual trust, like you both want the story and the anthology to do well. Leaning into that community, especially since both of these are community projects, I think is key in this case, or in any case, but especially in this case, to kind of keep you from maybe being too anxious about who you are to be editing this. I mean…
Cerid Jones (00:58:51):
(laughs) It’s the imposter syndrome thing, right? Like, I mean, I think as editors, as writers, as publishers, no matter what, if you have an authentic mind about stuff, you know, you are going to end up with some level of sort of imposter syndrome. And just how to kind of grapple with that. And I mean, for me, I’m just always very interested in the power dynamics that exist, whether they’re enforced or not enforced, ’cause they’re just present. They just are just present, you know? And that’s to do with the responsibilities, like you say, Elena, and finding that nice middle ground of agreement and trying to instill that you actually have any creative’s best interest at heart.
Elena L. Perez (00:59:38):
Right.
Cerid Jones (00:59:38):
And being able to function with that. And also working with a team of people. Like, there’s just so many different elements…
Elena L. Perez (00:59:46):
Mm-hmm.
Cerid Jones (00:59:46):
…to think about and assess all the time. And I don’t think before I started this, I don’t think I was kind of prepared. I’m so used to just working with one other person, you know? Or just us, the three of us as a team. We’ve been, you know, assessing submissions and publishing work and even editing work together that goes in occasionally, you know…
Elena L. Perez (01:00:08):
It kind of sneaks on you.
Cerid Jones (01:00:10):
Yeah. It’s really interesting. It’s really interesting. (laughs)
Melissa Reynolds (01:00:15):
Yeah. And, you know, I think the one thing that kind of helps me is to remember that yes, the author has the ultimate authority over the work, but in the end, once it leaves our hands and the author’s hands, it’s up to the readers to judge. And, you know, it’s like—the triangle, I think, is with the reader at the very top, because at the end of the day, they’re gonna decide whether it’s good for them or not.
Cerid Jones (01:00:46):
Mm-hmm.
Melissa Reynolds (01:00:46):
And for me, too, a lot of the times when I make suggestions, I’m thinking of the reader more than I’m thinking about ‘will this sell’ or…
Elena L. Perez (01:00:58):
Good point.
Melissa Reynolds (01:00:59):
Yeah. It’s more of a, ‘Hey, will the reader understand what’s going on here’? So, uh…
Cerid Jones (01:01:06):
That’s kind of the job that we are put in, right?
Melissa Reynolds (01:01:08):
Mm-hmm.
Cerid Jones (01:01:08):
it’s like we are like the middleman between the writer and the reader. And that’s whether you’re an editor or a publisher. That’s it. You are the middleman, trying to essentially be like a Babel fish between what’s the reader’s language and what’s the writer’s language.
Melissa Reynolds (01:01:23):
Yeah.
Cerid Jones (01:01:23):
And amalgamate that together so that it’s successful and gratifying. And success depending on what your individual version of success is. Successful doesn’t mean making a lot of money.
Elena L. Perez (01:01:34):
Mm-hmm.
Cerid Jones (01:01:35):
It can mean a whole bunch of different things. I just wanna make that really clear.
Melissa Reynolds (01:01:38):
Oh, yeah.
Elena L. Perez (01:01:38):
Yeah. (laughs) And also being careful that you’re not, for lack of a better word, gatekeeping. So, like you said, keep the reader in mind, yes, but also keep in mind that you have a bias of what the reader wants.
Melissa Reynolds (01:01:53):
Mm-hmm.
Elena L. Perez (01:01:54):
So, kind of just keeping all of that in mind and taking your own thoughts with a grain of salt.
Melissa Reynolds (01:02:00):
Absolutely.
Cerid Jones (01:02:02):
Yeah. It’s having that awareness.
Elena L. Perez (01:02:03):
Yeah.
Melissa Reynolds (01:02:04):
Yeah. It’s the idea of—I can edit something that I wouldn’t personally like to read, and that’s what you’re talking about there is being able to take that step back and say, ‘Hey, personally not a fan’. Like, for me personally, I don’t like mystery, so (laughs) I can edit a mystery book, but I wouldn’t go out and buy one to read. But I know that there—like my mom loves mysteries and I know there’s plenty of people out there who do, so it’s a, ‘Hey, I need to take a step back, make sure that my head isn’t too big…
Elena L. Perez (01:02:38):
Mm-hmm. (laughs)
Melissa Reynolds (01:02:38):
…and I’m not too full of myself. And focus more on what’s clear, what isn’t, are the author’s goals being reached’, that kind of thing.
Cerid Jones (01:02:50):
Yeah, well that’s where craft is so important, right? I think assessing something based on its merits of craft and genre is what can take you out of that bias. I mean, I can kind of relate to that. We had some really interesting discussions in our submission phase for this anthology, whereas, you know, it was quite clear to me that some of these pieces just weren’t the types of stories that some people on the submission team like to read, you know? Or it was exactly the type of story that they like and that bias comes through. I mean, we talk about this a lot at Metaworker, as well.
Elena L. Perez (01:03:27):
Yeah.
Cerid Jones (01:03:28):
You know, like, trying to be aware of our own biases and recognizing actually this theme or this idea isn’t my cup of tea, but is it done well? And if it’s done well and if it ticks interests that we know exist in the world because we understand readership markets, and I hate using that business term, but it is the appropriate one. You know, then it can still be successful even if it’s not to your personal taste. That’s one of the really hard ones. And that’s the difference between being an editor and being a peer review writer.
Elena L. Perez (01:04:02):
Mm-hmm.
Cerid Jones (01:04:02):
I think when you’re a peer review writer, you’re still thinking of your own biases and the stuff that you like and stuff that you read.
Elena L. Perez (01:04:10):
Yup.
Cerid Jones (01:04:10):
But when you’ve worked as an editor and you’ve had experience and been trained in this industry, you are able to put that bias aside. So, like when we were talking before about those sort of different levels of positions in the industry, I think that’s one of the key differences of what makes an editor separate from a beta reader or a peer reviewer is that we are aware, we are trained to be aware, of our own biases and how to fit those into a framework that is still beneficial for the author.
Elena L. Perez (01:04:44):
Mm-hmm.
Cerid Jones (01:04:44):
And for the readership and for what the end goal, like you say, Mel, ’cause that’s really important. What is the goal of this author? You always have to ask yourself that as an editor. But I feel like we’re getting onto editing conversation again. We’ve done a podcast on this. Sorry, we’re bad at this. (laughs)
Elena L. Perez (01:05:04):
(laughs) It’s just so much fun to talk about.
Cerid Jones (01:05:07):
I feel like I always derail us into an editing conversation and I’m sorry guys. (laughs)
Elena L. Perez (01:05:12):
It’s all good. (laughs)
Melissa Reynolds (01:05:13):
We let you do it because we like it, too. (laughs)
Elena L. Perez (01:05:17):
Yeah. (laughs)
Cerid Jones (01:05:18):
You’re just so much fun to talk editing with, damnit. (laughs)
Elena L. Perez (01:05:21):
Definitely. I love it. (laughs)
Elena L. Perez (01:05:25):
As you can hear, we got a little carried away talking, so we’re gonna stop here for now and continue with part two of this conversation in a separate episode. We’ll get technical and discuss the software Mel used to create her books, plus the benefit of fostering a community of new and seasoned writers and editors who can learn from each other. Also, since we recorded this back in July, Mel’s anthology, “River and Stone”, is now available for purchase as an ebook or physical book on Amazon or Barnes and Noble. Mel and Cerid have stories included in it, so we’ll post a link in the description for you to check it out.
