,
17 tweets,
4 min read
Read on Twitter
I've been looking at a lot of #comics/GN publishers' submission pages recently and one thing they nearly all have in common is a lack of information about what I, as a creator, might expect from a partnership.
Why would I favour x publisher over y publisher? What do they offer in terms of marketing, events, coverage? These differ greatly from publisher to publisher so wouldn't it make sense to be a bit more explicit?
Both as a story teller and in my main job as a writer of copy, one of my most important skills is to put myself in the position of a reader: what do they not know, and how can I convey it clearly? Publishers could do with a bit of that too!
I get it: the slush pile is overwhelming, probably more so than I can imagine. Maybe you don't want to encourage creators too much. But look at it this way: by more tightly defining what you offer (and what you don't) you'll receive more thoughtful and suitable submissions.
The more effort you put into your submission page, the higher the quality of the responses you'll receive.
Maybe just close submissions then? Either you want them or you don't, but at least show a little enthusiasm!!
Hopefully I haven't just severed all chances of ever getting my work seen with this mini rant. 😂 Oh well, back to self publishing it is then...
🤷♀️
Ah, one tweet from my thread got lost when I clicked the "tweet all" button. Tweet 6 was:
Those teetering slush piles mean that the typical page is acting as a gatekeeper: "Woe is us. We hate getting sent comics. We don't want to put you off, but seriously? We probably won't read your work. Even if we do, don't expect a reply".
Thinking more about my tweets of last night (about how little publishers disclose on what putative creators might expect from them and how unfriendly submissions pages can be) it occurred to me that of course publishers only see their own page, in isolation.
It's only the creators who experience the full gamut of submissions pages, probably within an hour as we do a bit of research, and so get that smack in the face multiple times. A lot of small discouragements that add up to the overall message of 'we do not wish to hear from you'. 
As I said last night, I do understand the reason behind all this gatekeeping; I'm only pointing out how discouraging it all is in aggregate.
My assessment is that in some of the examples I've included in the last tweet, publishers have thought a lot about their own needs but not about how it adds to that well of discouragement. I'm not sure if my favourite is 'send us nothing that you'd mind us throwing away'...
...or (paraphrased) "we won't actually tell you outright if we like your work, but you can take a strong hint if we're following you on Instagram" - which feels like teenage girls whispering 'of COURSE he likes you, why else would he be following you?'.
Again, none of this is supposed to be catty, or the mad rantings of a bitter, rejected artist (I haven't actually submitted anywhere yet and am not sure if I will!). It's just to point out how it all looks from here.
Actually that's a bit disingenuous. I haven't *formally* submitted anywhere but I have dangled my work in front of a couple of publishers. So maybe it's me who's behaving like a teenage girl. :/
