Son of Scalpel - What do YOU think?

You will only be told about Project Meinong when the time is right for you to know about Project Meinong...

Following the unfortunate and pre-mature failure of Scalpel Magazine I was struck by how many people had been paying attention to what we were up to.  Even if they hadn't been present at the discussions that launched the project or contributed they seemed to be genuinely sad when we folded.  Buoyed up by this experience, as well as the joy I took from editing the pieces I got to edit for Scalpel, I have decided to start thinking properly about a way to continue the project that we had tentatively started with Scalpel.

And so I turn to you people out there in the blogosphere and ask what you think.  I'm going to run through what my current thinking is on what I'm jokingly referring to, for want of an actual name, as Project Meinong (largely because it sounds pretentious and preposterous and because Alexius Meinong was the philosophical cup-bearer for non-existent objects), and I want people to let me know what they think.  Would you read it? would you be interested in contributing to it?

There are two things that I am quite clear on :

Firstly, Project Meinong will be a paying market.
Secondly, Project Meinong will not feature fiction.

When Gabe Chouinard and I launched Scalpel, we were quite surprised at how many people were willing to contribute to it purely out of the goodness of their hearts and without receiving a single cent in return for their labours.  Aside from being quite touched by this, I also felt slightly guilty as I've complained in the past about magazines such as Interzone not paying their contributors.  I also think that paying for content places the relationship between magazine and writer on a more even professional footing, which is code for saying that you can't flog your writers till they give the best they can possibly give if you're not giving them something in return for their troubles.  I'm not currently too bothered by business plans.  I'm happy to pick up the hosting fees and I'm happy to pay the writers out of my own funds, though at some time in the future I will have a donation drive.  I've made this decision because I believe in online reviewing, even to a greater extent than I believe in dead tree reviewing, and I want to put my money where my mouth is.

As for fiction, I don't want to include it partly because I don't really read much short fiction and partly because I think there are as of now at least a dozen top class venues for such work but mostly because my experience of the blogosphere tells me that if there's one cast iron guaranteed way of pissing people off it's by being in a position to turn down their fiction writing.  If you turn down a female writer you're a misogynist and if you turn down a masculine testosterone-fest then you're some kind of PC thug.  I don't want any part of that.

Beyond these two basic facts, I have pulled together a number of ideas as to what kind of magazine I want to publish.

A) The magazine will have three parts; Reviews, Interviews and Think-pieces.

B) The backbone of the magazine will be the reviews.  These will embody my understanding of what Gabe once called Street-Level Criticism.  By this, I mean pieces of criticism that are intelligent and challenging but nonetheless accessible to any and every genre fan who takes an interest in thinking a little bit more about what they're reading.

C) Project Meinong will understand that people who are seeking to understand a book or reach an opinion before purchasing are not likely to stop at one review.  As such, it follows that our critics will be under no pressure to be authoritative.  I want reviews that actively seek out sacred cows to butcher and that are unaffraid to throw out an idea purely for the sake of starting a debate.  My aim is to put together a magazine that complements sites such as Strange Horizons but that is more personal, subjective and argumentative.  In short, all of those terrible things that dead tree critics accuse online reviewing of being... only good.

D) Interviews will be all about asking demanding questions.  Too often, genre reviews are mere excuses for authors to plug their latest product.  Our interviews will allow such plugging but will also seek to nail authors down on what they have written because the goal of a good interview is not just to give a mouthpiece to the interviewee but also to coax some new truth out of them.

E) Think-pieces will come in any number of shapes.  These might include reflections about the SF scene or on particular authors, they might also be attempts to re-examine larger pieces of bodies of work or ask specific philosophical questions of works that we have long been familiar with.  their primary aim will be to challenge existing perspectives and attempt to forge new ways of looking at old issues, or merely different ways of looking at new ones.

F) I will treat every writer who deals with me as I would like to be treated.  By this I mean that I will respond as quickly as possible to any email that is sent to me, I will make editorial decisions as quickly as possible and I will make the running of the site as transparent as possible.  As a writer I hate it when editors are slow to respond or long to make decisions, effectively meaning that I can't offer a piece anywhere else.  I will also make sure to work with any writers to make sure that their piece is the best possible piece on that issue that they could write.  This means that I will be taking a hands-on role in editing.  I will never simply make a change or a cut without informing the writer.  Writers own their own work, I am merely paying for a period of exclusivity.

G) Because I'll be editing and paying for this magazine on my own, I will publish the magazine on a monthly basis.  Each month will include some work by me and four pieces of paid writing (I project paying $10 a go to start with).  The onus will be on quality rather than quantity or topicality.  A great article about an old book is as valuable as a great article on a new one and is far more worthy of our time than a mediocre article about a new book.  However, as I am still receiving ARCs, I will attempt to make sure that any ARCs I receive are reviewed.

 

Well... this is where I have gotten to in my thoughts.  I'm opening the issue up to people out there and I would love to hear, either in the comments or in private what people think about the plans I have in place and what I should be including that I am not. 

Comments

[Niall]

If you turn down a female writer you're a misogynist and if you turn down a masculine testosterone-fest then you're some kind of PC thug. I don't want any part of that.

Oh, I'm sure you can find a way to be a part of that no matter what kind of material you're publishing.

Anyway, as I was for Scalpel, so I am for this. I think starting off with a relatively modest publication schedule such as the one you propose is a good idea, and I will do my best to actually contribute this time. (This may be more likely come 2008 than it is now, to be fair.)

[Jonathan McCalmont]

I don't know... the short fiction scene seems particularly vicious. People who get reviews or features turned down tend to sulk more than rant :-)

Thanks for the support. The publication schedule will be as much a question of finances as quality control. I was coping with the Scalpel workload quite happily and could have done more but I don't want to ever feel personally in a position of having nothing to talk about so I'd rather have a more sedate schedule and be in a position to pick and choose my content.

[Paul Kincaid]

I'm in. Let me know when the plans turn serious.

[SCG]

You can count me in, too. :)

[Paul Raven]

Sounds like a plan, sir. Keep us posted.

[Tero Ykspetäjä]

Your project sounds really good. I was sorry to see Scalpel go (the start was very promising), so this new magazine would be very welcome.

[Jonathan McCalmont]

Thanks for the support everyone. I'm going to look into the technological stuff and have a look at where I stand.

I'm feeling well up for it though :-)

[Serdar]

Definitely curious about this! I liked what there was of Scalpel and want to see more in that vein.

[Ellen Datlow]

Very much looking forward to seeing the project as it unfolds.
I had to read Meinong in college-hated him.

[Karen Burnham]

I'm good for it, Jonathan, but I'll strongly urge you to find a new name before launch. Meinong just doesn't scream "cool specualtive fiction reviews/critiques" to me.

I'm afraid that I think I've already sold the piece we were talking about before Scalpel folded, but I'll try to come up with something else interesting.

[Jonathan McCalmont]

Thanks Karen.

Don't worry... Project Meinong is more a joke than anything else.

[Tero Ykspetäjä]

“I’m going to look into the technological stuff”

If you at some point want to bounce around ideas about tech stuff with someone with years of professional programming and web development experience, feel free to drop me an e-mail.

[Lee Harris]

I'd love to be involved, too, if there's room for one more somewhere... :-)

[neth]

I still like the idea - good luck with it.

[Ariel]

Glad to hear you're picking up the banner and marching on with it mate. Count me in on the promoting-via-bloggage front for a start.

[Al]

Sounds intriguing, I'd submit...

[MattD]

You know that I like the idea, I'll be happy to submit material for consideration. (Now I just need to think of something to write about....)

The ideas you list are all good. My only suggestion, after seeing what happened with Scalpel, is to try to avoid single points of failure -- not necessarily right off the bat, but as something to build towards.

[Jonathan McCalmont]

"Single point of failure"?

You mean having something rest all on one teeny-tiny lynch pin?

[La Gringa]

I thought I was the only one who didn't really enjoy short stories. :-)

I think it sounds like a great project.

As a publicist I will tell you, however, that just because we send you ARCS does not mean we expect you to review all of them. No review outlet reviews every title they receive. We hope you will take a look at the book, and that you'll read it and - if you enjoy it or find it interesting in some way - that you'll review it. But we know that most reviewers can only review about 15% of the books they get.

Anyway, good luck!

[Terry Weyna]

I would very much like to be involved in this project. Good luck, Jonathan: I hope you decide to jump!