Our two honorable mentions this year are as follows:

“Speaking In Arms: A Beast Fable” by C. M. Huard
A fable about deep and even deeper sea creatures that is a sort of Good Samaritan retelling, where the darkness is not void of light.

and

“The Diary” by John Kuhn
A story of a magical diary that lets a little girl make her desires come true, and of the father who is drawn into the frightening game of “make a wish.”

Second Prize goes to “Immortal” by Daniel I Weaver
A story about a deathless love and the price one man will pay for immortality.

And the First Prize this year goes to....

“Moonshot” by Chris Mikesell
A minister of a technology-averse sect of Christianity wins a trip to a high-tech, Las Vegas style resort on the moon. Brimming with keen characterization and a distinctive authorial voice, this story has a Joycean epiphany that adds resonance to its finale.

We invite you to visit www.dkamagazine.com for Christian Science Fiction and Fantasy, and especially in July, when we'll publish all the stories that made the final cut in our second annual contest.
~~~

Okay, the announcement: I've added another item to my editorial resume. I'm doing poetry editing over at FEAR & TREMBLING: Stories from the Shadowscape. This is a new magazine that officially launches very soon, but there is already content over at http://www.fearandtremblingmag.com for those who want to check it out. There's a great, very creepy bit of art to introduce you to the tone of the new magazine (ie, HORROR and CREEPY SUSPENSE). The magazine lucked out big time in getting Marcie Lynn Tentchoff, respected and award-winning poet, on the editorial staff. She and John Kuhn are really going gung-ho to get that magazine in top shape for your enjoyment. I just sort of help out a bit.

The magazine would love to see good Christian horror/creepy stories. But it must be scary. The emphasis is not on theology/sermonizing. It's on scaring readers. So, if you can do that sort of fiction—think of Daniel Weaver's stories in LIGHT AT THE EDGE OF DARKNESS for religious horror—we'd like to see it. And if you write excellent creepy poetry, we'd like to see that, too. We intend to be as choosy as possible, but getting the best to YOU means we need to have the best SUBMITTED TO US.

The magazine accepts non-religious fiction and poetry as well, but it can't have an excess of gore (subjective, yeah), any overt sexuality, or any bad language. We may not demand Christian, but we won't offer blatantly offensive or Anti-Christian.

So, there you go. Start writing and submitting. (Be aware our budget is pretty much nil, so we can't pay anything but the barest amount. Sorry. Perhaps as time goes on, between ad revenues and donations, we'll be able to offer higher rates.)

~~~~

Now, finally, the comments:

We were quite fortunate to get comments this past week from two CBA insiders(ie., editors) as they responded to a post by Wayne Thomas Batson called "An Open Letter to Publisher's Weekly." That post, in turn, was a response to the pessimistic outlook for fantasy offered by the journalist (similar to some we've heard from CBA editors and agents), despite some clearly optimistic quotes in the text itself.

Let's just say that this season was a bit brutal on those of us who have been championing SF, in contrast to the publication of more varied CSF in 2007 (LEGEND OF THE FIREFISH; THE RESTORER; DEMON: A Memoir; SAVING ERASMUS; and etc.).

It's like tennis. Something good. Whack. Something negative. Whack. Something positive. Whack. Something bad.

I'm getting woozy.

Anyway, the first comment was from Andy Meisenheimer of Zondervan:

A few words, hopefully to everyone's benefit.

Both the ABA and the CBA are tough businesses to break into, for their own reasons. Both of them boil down to the bottom line: Will this make money?

The ABA makes money by reaching fantasy readers. The CBA makes money by reaching Christian readers.

So don't expect the ABA to be easier to break into. Especially if your fantasy isn't very good. Bad fantasy actually has a better chance of being published in the CBA if the publishing house is more enamored with inspirational elements than good fantasy or brilliant writing.

Setting the record straight: I'm considering all types of fantasy, but I think that non-traditional genres like science-fantasy or modern fantasy has the best potential in the market, versus swords-and-elves. Zondervan hired me to find good genre fiction, not fantasy in particular. In terms of "none worthy so far"—it's true that a lot of what I see is pretty darn terrible, but I have two excellent projects in the works for which I have high expectations.

Come of my thoughts after reading this:

1. Maybe the reason we've been bemoaning the bad SF in the CBA (more than excellent ones) over the last decade is because of that key bit about the Christian element that reaches those Christian readers who may not care as much about having the most innovative or best written SF elements.

2. CBA's focus will continue to be reaching Christian readers. That means being cutting edge in SF is not the publishers' agenda. (Doesn't mean it can't happen, the innovative and fresh and surprising, but the CBA is still about fiction that's  CHRISTIAN.)

I don't think this is negative at all. I also don't think the CBA needs to change its focus. I've heard that the CBA should reach out, wider, wider. And that's fine. But it's fiction for Christians, first, and if it reaches a wider audience, super!  I am not one of those who thinks that CBA fiction's purpose is evangelistic—write to get people saved—first and foremost. I think fiction's purpose is to be good fiction, good storytelling, even GREAT storytelling. Everything else is secondary. And I believe Christians need good stories that reflect THEIR reality as much as non-Christians. And, hey, some of us are tired of salvation allegories and preachy stories, because we sense that it does seem less of a cracking tale and more of a Bible lesson in prose clothing.

3. Note also what Andy says so honestly, and which we should take totally to heart as people who want to write well, not just spiritually. I'll requote:In terms of "none worthy so far"—it's true that a lot of what I see is pretty darn terrible, but I have two excellent projects in the works for which I have high expectations

"Pretty darn terrible."

"But I have two excellent projects in the works."


There's the negative. There's the positive. Whack. Whack. :)

We can work NOW to change the first. Yes, we can. We have to work very, very hard on being the opposite of"terrible."
 
If we say we do this writing thing for the Lord—okay, and for ourselves as well, because we must, or because there is satisfaction in self-expression and using creative gifts—then it's our duty to make it tip-top. No shabby offerings.

If it's not excellent, don't send it out. Period. Don't submit stuff that isn't getting raves from your critique partners or contest judges (not all, but at least some) or agents or that editor you hired to line edit you . Just don't do it. Keep raising the craft. Andy doesn't need to see more bad writing, and neither do any of us who do editing in much more modest venues.

What Andy says about quality is emphasized in the comment posted by Nick Harrison (Harvest House):

I'm bothered by the fact that anyone would automatically discount speculative fiction as a category and label it "dead." I'll have to take Steve Laube to task for that. The plain truth is that the biggest obstacle to publication in ANY genre is simply poor writing. And frankly I'm not convinced that just because one author succeeds in a genre, others will also. Bryan Polivka's first book with us (The Legend of the Firefish) is doing well, even though it's a bit early to predict just HOW well it will do. But I'd encourage you to go over to the Christian Book Distributors (CBD) site and take a look at some of the reviews he's getting.

My advice is to stop worrying about the genre itself, and concentrate on writing the best possible manuscript you can. Think outside the genre box. If you have to search all the harder for a publisher, well so be it. JUST WRITE REALLY GOOD STUFF!

If Legend of the Firefish does well, I think it will be because Bryan Polivka reaches ACROSS genre lines. Readers who may not normally enjoy "speculative fiction" enjoy the story because it's very well written and has compelling characters. That's what attracted me to the manuscript in the first place. I was not looking for a fantasy novel. And when I acquired Brandt Dodson (Original Sin, Seventy Times Seven, The Root of All Evil) for Harvest House I was not looking for PI fiction. The point is that I was pulled into the stories almost immediately and the power of the writing overcame any objections I might have based on what's "hot" or what's "dead." Great writing is simply the key, in my opinion.

Again, things that should really stand out and burn themselves in your brain (as they do in mine):

1. the biggest obstacle to publication in ANY genre is simply poor writing.

2. concentrate on writing the best possible manuscript you can.

3. the power of the writing overcame any objections I might have based on what's "hot" or what's "dead."

4. Great writing is simply the key

Notice that both gentlemen said they are open to SF, they are not closed about it. They are willing to buy in our genre if the stuff is GOOD ENOUGH to make them sit up and notice. (I assume it also has to be suitable for their audience.)

Unlike some cases when we hear from and editor or agent that they simply don't do CSF, these men say, "Yes. But you gotta knock my socks off fictionally."

I don't think it's that much of a scoop to say that great writing opens doors when poor writing won't. But I wanted to say that aside from all our solidarity stuff, promotional stuff, encouragement stuff, and prayer, we need to think of ourselves as craftsmen, and we had better learn to master every tool in our writing and storytelling box. Or in five years, we'll have made no progress.

Polish. Polish. Polish.

And if it still doesn't work, then find a way to get to a higher place in craft. Take classes. Do workshops. Buy tapes. Analyze top novels. Read your dialogue into a tape recorder—play it back. Find a mentor who'll be honest at all times and encouraging in the dark nights of the writing soul. Start something new.

Are you reading the best out there, secular and Christian? If not, start studying them. Study how to make sentences sing. How to make characters distinctive and alive. And most of all, work at hatching your voice.

Let me move back to the contest. "Moonshot," the winner, won me over because it has as I wrote up there, a distinctive authorial voice. The runner up was one that I had to agonize over, because the other contenders each had something that got to me. But I ultimately went with voice again. "Immortal" has a very, very different voice from "Moonshot," but more importantly, it had a distinctive sound to it. It didn't sound like someone writing by numbers, even if I knew where the ending was going. It's not a flawless piece, but it's a piece that has the sound of a real character, a somewhat antique character. That won me over.

There's a lot of flat prose out there. Prose without life, without a spirit and personality shining through. Without voice.

Now, every human being has a personality and spirit and voice. Your kids recognize your sound, as does your husband or wife, as do your parents. Somehow, you have to find a way to be THAT distinctive when you write. And sometimes, having too many cooks in your pot can wipe off the shine of what is you. Sometimes, not having enough cooks in the kitchen means the stew is tasteless. But somehow, find what snaps about you and put it on the page.

And learn to fashion beautiful prose—whether you like it dreamy and ornate or whether you're going for sparse and masculinely potent or any of the shades between, learn to make sentences that give pleasure, not just convey information. I can't tell you how much I detest reading something that's just telling me where people are walking, where they sit, what they're wearing, who they're talking to, and yet there isn't an ounce of life or complexity in it. It's all empty choreography with surface emotions. People aren't like that. We're confounding. We're not always aware of why we say or do things. We lie. We manipulate. We fool ourselves. We rise above ourselves. We don't all sound like medieval scholars. We don't all sound like the news anchor. Or your pastor.

 Study how the pros add layers. (I'm still doing this, and I still am jealous as all at those who do it with such panache.) Make your sentences and paragraphs and scenes deep and layered. Let there be some ambiguity here and mystery there. (Judges hate this, but a lot of SF readers love it. And a lot of pros have stories still discussed years later because no one is exactly sure what happened at the end. Hey, it's not for all your works, but it might be the key to a scene or chapter or character.)

When the people around you go, "Oh, Lawdy! I had to stay up all night reading those last chapters you send me to critique. I simply had to read on or I couldn't rest." When your manuscript doesn't come back covered in highlights and critical comments on every page. When a judge  says, "I didn't know who wrote this, for sure, but all I needed was one page to believe it was you. I heard you in these words so clearly." Then you definitely should submit.

Make Andy go, "Hey, that's not terrible at all. That's really, really good."

Make Nick say, "Now, that's some REALLY GOOD STUFF!"


I'll add that I see more of a desire to be flexible in my circle of writing friends, people who want the freedom to do ABA and CBA type fiction, fiction with heavy spirituality and fiction with more edge and less Scriptural talk, but perhaps clear Biblical echoes or a heart full of truth. This may be something the Lord is putting in our souls. Could be. Storytellers for the Body on one side, and Artists of Truth for the other. And this is a good thing. Competition is murder in the ABA SF genre. You'll be submitting to editors and houses who've read the BEST of the BEST, and they've seen all the cliches and hackneyed plots and characters. If we keep one eye on the ABA, I think that alone will force us to stretch our writing muscles.

So, I encourage all of you who write SF of the C kind, to challenge yourselves to write with an eye to submitting to one of the respected secular SF magazines. I think that you'll find that if you know your competition are the bestselling authors in the field, the Nebula winners, the Hugo winners, the World Fantasy winners, and the Locus honorees, that you will not be satisfied with just "good." You'll strive for insanely great.

It's a suggestion I hope you'll give due consideration. Most of the SF greats on my shelves  wrote/write short fiction as well—Wolfe, Ellison, Willis, Haldeman, Scott Card, Lee, Butler, Asimov, Zelazny, McKillip, Yolen, Sturgeon, Silverberg, Bloch, Poe, Beagle, Le Guin, etc.  And it takes a lot less time to write a story than an entire novel manuscript's first draft. And it might put you in a striving for glory mindset. :)

I'm gonna give it a shot.

Now, go and create someone's future favorite book.