Burning Effigy Press

Well, I'm certainly glad I took time out of my day to attempt to have a rational discussion with Monica, and to try to explain that no offense was intended and a bit about the purpose of the forum/why people react the way they do here.

Apparently the fact that one comment she doesn't like appears here means the entire forum is negative and evil. Okay.

I tell people all the time that a high-prestige-but-low-pay venue can be as smart a decision as a high-pay venue.

How to tell a high-prestige venue: Publishes authors you've heard of (top names); frequently appears on short-lists for awards (awards you've heard of); frequent reprints in year's-best anthologies.

Even if a publisher offers no pay at all, one with those attributes is worthwhile.

You have to know enough about the genre you're working in to know which authors are the top authors and which awards are worth winning. But you, young author--you know that about your own genre, right?

So, what we have established is that Burning Effigy press are a legitimate business with a good reputation, both in the industry and with the authors they represent, that they serve a niche market and (at present) are not looking to expand their business in the future.



Monica, regarding your thread on Google plus.

To correct you - I, at least, care about my craft. Perhaps you didn't read my anecdote in my earlier post or maybe you simply missed the point: if I sign up with a press whose goals do not match my own, I might as well go with Publish America. The end is the same - my work is dead.
I will say it again - publishers do not fall into "legitimate" and "scammer". I know what I am capable of bringing to the party, so I know - for instance - if I read a thread here about a particular press in which somebody says the marketing of a book is 100% in the author's hands, I know it probably won't be a good match for *me*. It's not a criticism, it's not talking from my arse, it's information which enables me to make an informed decision.
If a press says they aren't "in this shit for the bucks", it is not unreasonable for me to conclude I will not achieve a regular part-time income from publishing with them. It's still not a criticism.
If I am not somebody whose work meets the niche remit of your press, it is a waste of your time and mine to submit my work to you. Threads like this one help people like me to know what you are all about.

Yes, I freely admit to needing to get paid. I'll say it again, I *need* paying.
I write because I love it. I drag what hours I can away from other things in order to do it. I am not about to risk my work with a publisher whose enthusiasm outweighs their ability. Happily, you do not fall into such a category, but there are a heck of a lot of presses which do.

I understand you feel defensive. However, stuff like (taken from your Google plus thread)

It just helped remind me why we're curated, because if folks like that lurk in the slush pile, well, it might be best that they stay there. I mean I have honestly never seen a group of writers less concerned about their craft and more concerned about their paycheque. Getting paid is important, but it shouldn't eclipse everything else. I can't imagine what it would be like working with some of those folks as a publisher/editor with attitudes like that.

Click to expand...

demonstrates perfectly how scam presses manage to succeed. They rely on people who don't know about publishing being too cowed to ask questions about things they don't understand in case their deal is snatched away, or in case they get a "bad reputation" in the industry.

The agents who blog repeatedly stress that nobody should mind answering these kinds of questions and anybody who does should certainly be taken a careful look at. I understand your problems with how they were phrased. I hope you understand our position also.

AW does great work teaching new writers about all aspects of the industry. Do not confuse a single person, whom you felt phrased their opinion inelegantly, with the entire community.

Ian Rogers said:

I admit I was upset when I first read this thread. But then, I've worked with Burning Effigy, so it's natural that I would feel at least a bit defensive. But I really wanted to look past the hurt feelings on both sides and focus on the main issues, which is the press and the books. I posted my own experience in the hopes of showcasing the quality of both.

Maybe things have gone too far here for that to be possible. But I still appreciate the chance to talk to everyone here.

And it should go without saying that I totally respect your choice to only review the books you want to.

Click to expand...

Your posts have been professional and informative and I hope you'll remain an active member of AW.

~brianm~

*Takes deep breath*

This is worth repeating:

Theo81 said:

So, what we have established is that Burning Effigy press are a legitimate business with a good reputation, both in the industry and with the authors they represent, that they serve a niche market and (at present) are not looking to expand their business in the future.

Click to expand...

This thread got off on the wrong foot. But just in case anyone is still reading (or will read this in the future), I wanted to make sure that they knew the above.

I'll admit that my first post was mostly based on emotions, but I stand by the fact that I, and other writers like me, need money to live. Need money. Writing is both my passion and my full time job. It's a blessing and a curse.

I'm going to ignore the plus.google link, because I really don't want to drag this out any further.

Thank you again, Mr. Ian Rogers, for sharing your experiences with us.

Good luck to all parties reading this.

AW criticized BE, BE criticized AW. She linked to AW, AW linked back. Pot, meet kettle.

I think Little Ming is right -- time to end the feud.

kellion92 said:

AW criticized BE, BE criticized AW. She linked to AW, AW linked back. Pot, meet kettle.

I think Little Ming is right -- time to end the feud.

Click to expand...

"AW" didn't "criticize" BE. "AW" is not a single entity. An individual AW member stated her interpretation of a line on BE's website. Perhaps it was a bit harshly worded. But it wasn't a criticism, it was an interpretation. Even if it was a criticism, it was still made by one single AW member, not by the forum as a whole.

BE showed up and took great umbrage to that statement. A few people didn't react well to that. Some of us tried to explain it and move the discussion on, but to no avail. BE then informed however many people that AW was an evil and negative place and all AWers don't give a damn about quality work, thus directly criticizing each and every person here, including you.


FWIW I thought BE looked like a pretty cool little place, once that statement was explained. I was impressed, and was very much hoping Monica would stick around and move past the beginning of the thread to tell us more about it. There aren't many niche markets like that out there anymore, and it's a far cry from "We lose money all the time and we're happy to do so" to "We make a profit but reinvest it in the business because we're passionate." The latter sounds like people I'd enjoy working with. Yes, I need to make money, but it's also fun to experiment, and I don't need or expect to make a lot from everything I do (this is why I do free shorts, and why I wrote a Foreword for a charity anthology to benefit the Breast Cancer Research Foundation, too, and was thrilled and honored to do so in the name of my close friend's late sister Elizabeth Chang, who died of breast cancer).

I'm not impressed any longer. I don't enjoy being called a hack who doesn't give a shit about my work simply because I belong to a particular forum, and I don't enjoy being called a hack who doesn't care about my work simply because I put a lot of time and effort into helping writers evaluate the pros and cons of different publishers or agents.

I can understand--as I said in my post--why Monica would feel hurt and upset by the posts here. I don't blame her for feeling that way. But I would have had a lot more respect for her had she behaved calmly and professionally despite her feelings--the issue could have been cleared up instantly had she just explained what the line meant right off the bat--and actually joined in the discussion, rather than running around name-calling and pointing fingers.

I said AW because I didn't feel like calling out individuals and exacerbating things, but when tempers are high, anything is fuel. That's all.

You can name me. I don't mind.

Stacia Kane said:

I can understand--as I said in my post--why Monica would feel hurt and upset by the posts here. I don't blame her for feeling that way. But I would have had a lot more respect for her had she behaved calmly and professionally despite her feelings--the issue could have been cleared up instantly had she just explained what the line meant right off the bat--and actually joined in the discussion, rather than running around name-calling and pointing fingers.

Click to expand...

Exactly. It's always interesting to see how representatives of professional entities react to things.

James D. Macdonald said:

I tell people all the time that a high-prestige-but-low-pay venue can be as smart a decision as a high-pay venue.

How to tell a high-prestige venue: Publishes authors you've heard of (top names); frequently appears on short-lists for awards (awards you've heard of); frequent reprints in year's-best anthologies.

Even if a publisher offers no pay at all, one with those attributes is worthwhile.

You have to know enough about the genre you're working in to know which authors are the top authors and which awards are worth winning. But you, young author--you know that about your own genre, right?

Click to expand...

Your objectivity both here and on the linked site puts many a publisher to shame, JamesD.

As someone just reading through the threads trying to make an informed decision, I'll openly say I'm pissed with your comments, Monica.

I thought the days of being burnt at the stake just because you owned a black cat (or in this case, an aw username) were dead and buried. Perhaps being flicked with a touch of unprofessionalism is the new alternative? (like, jen, my words, my view, my judgement--not AW's, not Mac's, not any mod's, or any other member here on AW.)

I'm used to seeing publishers debate their corner, and I have every respect for that: you get an essence of how driven and passionate they are, and with the skill and expertease of other AW members, you get a sense of how genuine they are. But when the discussion is moved off-board into school-yard scraps over 'them and us'....

It could have been handled a lot more professionally, is all.

Hey all, I stepped away from this thread for a good long time because things honestly got way too heated and were turning me into someone I'm usually not (as evidenced by that undeniably inflammatory Google post). To be completely honest, I think the thing that pushed me over the edge was the comment about "Why did it take you 30 days to respond to this thread?" It's one thing to be asked to defend my press, my business model and my authors, but I should not have to defend how I spend my time.

That said, what I said about slush piles was undeniably harsh, but it does to a certain extent hold true. I've found from both my dealings with my small press and the magazine that the hunger and drive for literary success often does not go hand in hand with talent. Many times, those with the least talent are also the most persistent, rude and demanding. I don't know why this is the case, but I have seen it time and time again. And this was indeed part of the reason we went to a curated publishing model, the rest of it being that I just don't have time to read bucketloads of submissions.

Anyways, I wanted to pop by and apologize if I painted all the writers and aspiring writers here by the same brush, of course I know this isn't the case, but sometimes when it feels like your baby (and if anything Burning Effigy is just that, a labour of love that I have worked extremely hard at most of my adult life, and made many sacrifices for) - and by way of that, yourself - is being wrongly maligned, it is easy to get uppity. Hence why I decided to remove myself from this conversation for a good long while.

Time outs are good for grown ups too, who knew?

It's good to have you back, Monica. I hope things are going well for you, and I hope you stick around.