Elephant's Bookshelf Press Call for Short Story Submissions: Science Fiction

Matt Sinclair, a long-time writer/publishing colleague and friend of mine, has launched a call for submissions for Elephant's Bookshelf Press's latest anthology. The genre is science fiction with a connecting theme of flight for all submissions. Word count is up to 5,000 and the deadline is Jan. 15th, 2019. No erotica. Submissions are vetted by a panel, and go through a complete editing process if accepted.

The theme is more broad reaching than you might think. To quote directly from Matt's announcement:

"One of the reasons I like this theme is because it’s a term that has multiple meanings and therefore multiple interpretations. Of course, flight can involve human or alien spaceships, heroes with super-human abilities, winged creatures, but it just as easily could include flight from danger. Heck, I bet there’s a clever person out there who can make a flight of stairs into a vital element of a science fiction story.

"I don’t want to be too restrictive in this description. The story should incorporate flight; I leave the details to you."

While contributors aren't compensated monetarily, you do get a free print and ebook copy of the anthology. This will count as a viable writing credit for your bio. You'll also be in good company with other published writers who have contributed to past anthologies.

Previous anthologies published by EBP
 
Why not give it a whirl?

Guest Post: How Science Fiction and Fantasy Have Changed Over the Years

I'd like to welcome author Scott Seldon to the blog today to share his thoughts about a topic I've begun to investigate. It's good to share ideas and the thoughts of others and I hope to be able to add to them when I relay my own findings in the future. This is a starting point and I'm grateful to Scott for kicking it off. Please share your own thoughts in the comments.
 
What we think of as genre fiction didn't really exist a century ago. Jules Verne did not write science fiction, he wrote fantastical adventures based on his knowledge of science and where it could lead. H.G. Wells projected his hopes and fears of the future, again based on science. Edgar Rice Burroughs wrote romances (then the term did not mean what it means today; it referred to stories like Le Morte D'Arthur and Ivanhoe) set on other worlds. Today we consider all three and their works to be the foundations of science fiction. Their stories stand the test of time, but they are nothing like what we see modern writers producing.

You just have to look at the changes in our world to understand some of the changes to science fiction. In 1915, WWI raged in Europe. Einstein was a German. His Theory of Relativity had yet to be proven and was only ten years old. Atomic energy and weapons had not been dreamed of yet. Airplanes and automobiles existed, but were not much more than toys of the rich, though there already was an electric car. Spaceflight was a dream and Goddard hadn't even conducted his experiments yet.

Language has also changed, as has education. Latin was nearly always included as were the classics. It was to this world that science fiction and fantasy were born. Science fiction pushed into the future and to the other planets then known. They were swashbuckling adventures and their science was questionable by today's standards, but they let their imagination fly. Isaac Asimov was born in 1920 and grew up on the short stories produced in that period. C. L. Moore set out to write westerns, but ended up writing science fiction and fantasy. The stories for both genres bore some similarities because they still relied on the romance model. The difference was they were stories set in the future in space or in the past. Nearly all of the authors that would become well-known icons of science fiction and fantasy were growing up or starting their first works. J. R. R. Tolkien was about to begin his construction of Middle Earth as he manned the trenches.

But a century ago, none of this had happened yet and what we think of as a complex genre had yet to really be born. People did write what we today consider to be genre works, but the genre had yet to even be born. Typically the founding of science fiction as a genre dates to 1926 with the publishing of Amazing Stories.

Let's jump forward 50 years to 1965. Science fiction was in what I think of as a golden age. The greats were publishing stories and new writers constantly sprang up. Isaac Asimov had retired from fiction while Arthur C. Clarke and Robert Heinlein were going strong. The Lord of the Rings was complete and the seminal work of fantasy. The space age was on. Satellites orbited our planet and astronauts and cosmonauts had been in space. Science fiction graced our TV and movie screens. In fact, 50 years ago as I write this, both Lost In Space and Star Trek were in the works and Doctor Who had been on the air for well over a year. 2001 was still a few years away as was the Apollo program.

Gone were the Romances in space that filled the early years. Monsters, aliens, strange worlds, amazing sights, and incredible encounters filled the pages (and screens). Writers looked to the future, hopeful that we would soon be doing these things. Stories were set 20-40 years in the future with incredible ideas of where we could be. Some dreamed further and created the civilization they hoped we would develop into. Science fiction roamed the universe, peeing into every corner and finding amazing things. I would use one word to describe the tone of most fiction from this period - hope.

Language has changed. Latin was not yet gone but the classics were being studied less and less. Instead there were new topics to cover in schools. Science abounded with new discoveries. Medical, chemistry, and physics textbooks were filled with new things that previous generations had been forced to learn the hard way. We spoke in a more direct manner and the writing reflects that. Asimov, Clarke, Heinlein and the others used simple and clear language.

Some things in life had just begun to change. The Civil Rights Act had only been passed the previous year. No one had heard of LGBT and marriage equality referred to interracial marriage. Gene Roddenberry was forced to cede his female second in command and had to fight to keep the alien character. Uhura had yet to be cast and he had to fight for that. What we see today as a token African American and Asian American on the Enterprise bridge were hard won fights for diversity.

Which brings me to today. I feel that science fiction has lost that hope. 50 years on and the space program is routine. We have not even started a lunar colony or sent a manned mission to Mars. We are 15 years past 2001 and we have done none of these things that movies and novels projected. Science has come down hard on some of the old tropes such as FTL, time travel, anti-gravity, teleporters, and the like. Consequently, you don't see these those things as much any more, though Star Trek and Doctor Who refuse to give them up. Instead of professional scientists churning out the likes of Foundation, Caves of Steel, 2001, and many others, they stick to the facts, what could be real. Hard science fiction is no longer just for scientists, but it is braked by what the scientists deem possible. Our dreams of the future have gotten closer to home and are less fantastic.

Fantasy, on the other hand, is having its own golden age. The publication of some very epic tales by Robert Jordan and George R. R. Martin are truly incredible in scope. Terry Brooks and Stephen R. Donaldson have given us some great dark evil in their stories and given their heroes the talents to overcome. The likes of Sam Sykes and Mark Lawrence are currently showing us how dark the world can be. The adventure continues in the pages of the many fantasy writers out there as they explore ever more interesting worlds.

Tolkien still inspires. His language, as fitting a professor of linguistics, is an art of its own and that pushes fantasy writers to make good use of language. His world building set the bar high and few truly come up to his level, but not for want of trying. That isn't to say that it is in any way out of reach of readers, but I have noticed writers spend a few more words to help paint the picture.

Science fiction is producing some truly great works as well, but the tone is different. The sense of the incredible that was there a century ago and the sense of hope from 50 years ago has been replaced with exploring society. Science has cut off many from exploring the limits of theory, but they make good use of practical science and weave incredible tales. There is no lack of story telling skills.


Scott writes science fiction and prefers that idea of hope found in mid-20th century science fiction. He is currently writing about a space trader in the far future and looking for interesting ideas for his next novel. He is a big fan of Isaac Asimov, Robert Heinlein, and Jack McDevitt.

You can find him at his blog and on Smashwords.

The Query Process: The Numbers Aren't What You'd Think

I've come to about the end of my agent research, a cumulative effort of five years' work.

1. I combed through the data bases on both Agent Query and Query Tracker and created a list of potential agents based on what they said their preferences were. I ended up with nearly 300 names.

Great start, right? I thought, I'd surely find several interested agents with these odds.

2. Next, I visited each agent's website or did further research into what they want, what they represent, and if they were still agenting or taking unsolicited queries. This took up most of my time, was often tedious and frustrating, but was well worth the effort.

Some agent's are very open about who they represent and specifically state what they want. Most are vague and tend to generalize. Compared to when I began my research five years ago, more agents have an online presence today. So if their agent bio on their website unhelpfully says they want YA projects, there are usually interviews, spotlights, and other data available online to clarify what types of YA projects they gravitate toward.

By the end of this phase, my promising list of 300 was down to 160 agents. And I learned another valuable piece of querying information which promised to dwindle that list even more.

3. Many agencies state that you may only query one agent. Some say "at a time" but most give you the option of one and one only. Often this is because agent's will pass on a query letter to another person in their office they think would be a better match, or because they discuss query letters as an agency. It makes sense and is good news for querying writers.

However, this meant I needed to prioritize my agent list. So I drew up a second list, one which pulled the agencies from the first list. I put all the potential agents under the banner of their agency and then researched them further to give them a pecking order. I found that every agency that didn't have the "one only" rule, I had only one potential agent for. With the other agencies, I assigned numbers to each of the agents, based on who I thought would be my strongest fit down to the least likely. It's a rather revealing process, one which should make my query letters better when I state why I chose to query that agent.

My list went down from 160 to 95. The odds might look not so well in my favor now on one hand. On the other hand, I stand to waste less time querying agents who wouldn't fit, and the potential of garnering more partial or full requests raises.

4. This step goes with step 3, but I'm giving it a separate place. This is my last step in the research phase, delving deeper by subscribing to Publisher's Marketplace. Here I can find out exactly what these agents are acquiring, selling, and representing. I'll go back through my prioritized list to make sure the pecking order is as it should be. I expect there'll be changes. The number may even drop from 95.

And that's okay. As I stated in my recent query advice post, you want to target the right agents. It's not about how many agents you query, but who you query and why.

I had to think long-term when making cuts to my agent list. While my current project fits under one genre banner or age group, other projects differ. I don't mean as drastic a difference as say, a thriller versus a children's book, but rather more like the difference between a fantasy and a science fiction. Some agents don't do both. I had to find potential agents who would fit my entire writing career, not just one project.

I know I took longer at it than the average writer. I like to be thorough. So don't feel like you have to take five years to research. But I can't say it enough, do more research than you first feel inclined to do. If anything, it will help cut the depressing numbers of rejections you'll receive.

If I had only done step #1, then sent out query letters to those nearly 300 agents, my rejection numbers probably would have killed my publication aspirations within weeks. Querying after step #2 would have been better, but I'd have not only received a lot of rejections, I probably would have alienated quite a few agencies as well by not following the "query only one agent" rule. Querying after step #3 might have been fine and safe, but what if the agent I targeted hadn't been the right one for me, and they didn't feel like passing on my query to anyone else in the office that day? Despite well written query letters and research, sometimes getting an agent depends on luck and an agent's mood.

From my point of view, why not take the time and give your story its best chance for success?

Guest Post by Ian Isaro: What Makes Epic Fantasy Tick

Welcome to today's guest blogger, Ian Isaro! I asked Ian to write a post about what makes epic fantasy work because he's read more of it than anyone else I know. Pretty good qualifications. Ian is the author of the Sorcery and Scholarships series. You can find him writing about fantasy on his blog.
Thanks again, Ian, for letting me put you on the spot. And here he is:


"Grand Prelate! The Sylvans are fording the Turvlebip River! The Thoris Mage has the Staff of Ghrblgk and is bringing down the Great Wall!"

"By the curly beard of Bupkis the Terrible!" Al'thir'evaeael cursed.

At least some of you think of this kind of thing when you think about epic fantasy. That example is somewhat over the top, but only somewhat. These are the doorstopper novels that have thousands of characters with a few dozen invented languages and can span decades.

I was asked to write about what makes epic fantasy tick, so I'm not going to worry too much about an exact definition of epic fantasy. A proper definition wouldn't necessarily match the above stereotypes and there's variety even within the subgenre. Instead, I'm going to focus on the five factors that I think make epic fantasy work: scope, immersion, depth, stakes, and earned endings.

Scope

I realized how much scope matters to me while reading Steven Erikson's Malazan Book of the Fallen. Ten books totaling over three million words - what matters isn't the length, but what that many words allows the series to do.

In the last book, there's a conversation where two characters discuss the state of reality, and there are even more names dropped than in my example. Except by that point, you know every single name - not only that, you've read entire novels about each one. The dozen different conflicts mentioned aren't just some throwaway world building, each is a place you know with characters you've walked with throughout the series. It brought home that this is truly a conflict for reality.

Scope also gives us variety and diversity. Some series pretend to be about a "world" but it's really just medieval Europe spread across a larger area. Scope isn't a million league kingdoms or billion soldier armies, it's all the details that give a better sense of size than simple numbers can. Good epic fantasy gives multiple continents, races, cultures, or conflicts. It doesn't shy away from personal problems and smaller issues, but it includes them as part of a living, breathing world.

Immersion

This brings us to immersion, which is one of the central appeals of epic fantasy. Others have already written about how it brings readers back, so I'll try to focus on other aspects. Immersion is when the setting isn't just a vehicle for the author's ideas, but a fully-realized entity that has more to offer than what's on the surface. This perhaps more than anything is what draws readers into worlds and keeps them there.

It's Tolkien's complete languages. Wheel of Time's two thousand characters. The edges of Robin Hobb's maps. It's the promise that "Grand Prelate" isn't just a random title for yet another interchangeable authority figure, but reflects a culture and system that will continue strengthen to the story.

Immersion also allows for very satisfying payoffs. Because epic fantasy typically has more worldbuilding, you can afford to place all kinds of Chekov's guns on many different mantles. By the end of even the first book of an epic, readers are familiar with a wide variety of characters, places, forces, and all manner of elements that can be thrown together without the need for any more setup. Sanderson always does this, putting pieces in place for 75% of a book and then setting off a cascade of events that sweeps through the ending.

Epics stand far away from the problem of too-tidy stories, where absolutely everything seems to exist only to serve a role in the plot and tie things up with a neat little bow. Most of them err in the opposite direction, but it's the breadth of the world that gets readers to commit, since it reflects the messiness of reality and hence has the feel of a "real" story instead of a parable or fable.

Depth

Not to imply that other kinds of fiction don't have depth, but the size of epic fantasy allows it to do different things. The beauty of a short story is that it focuses entirely on one thing. By contrast, the strength of epic fantasy is that it can be about many things, and weave different themes together over a long period of time.

Length allows for subtlety, themes sneaking up on you, getting beneath your defenses against obvious Messages and Morals. Instead of characters dramatically turning from good to evil, they can slide slowly, reflecting all the shades of grey in the real world and forcing you to think seriously about the issues at hand.

The length of epic fantasy lets characters breathe, experiencing a wide variety of emotions and life circumstances. No one has to be the Coward or the Hero, but can display both heroism and cowardice at different times, closer to the diversity seen in human beings.

Stakes

Perhaps the most important difference between epic fantasy and other subgenres is that in epics something critical must be at stake. All too often this is the fate of the world, but it goes deeper than that. Epic fantasy is about the world changing.

Lord of the Rings is a good example. It's about the passing of an age, old powers fading, technology gaining strength. It isn't a story where the villain is defeated and the status quo is restored, but one where nothing will ever be the same. Deeper, it's a story about the rejection of dominance as the only path to peace - several characters could have taken the Ring and won, but at the cost of their souls.

The Earthsea series reflects another important side of epic fantasy. All of it could fit into one novel of many other series, but the stakes are no less important. It's about the shifting of paradigms, first personal realities and eventually spiritual realities that profoundly affect everything.

Earned Endings

This awkwardly-named section is one that I don't see mentioned often, but I think is an underappreciated strength of epic fantasy. There are many things that might feel hollow or false in a shorter story that can be accomplished in a longer series.

Let's take a simple example of power: a naive farmboy becoming a mighty swordsman. In fairy tales, he gets a magic sword and that's the end of it. Some short fantasy has the equivalent of a training montage and then he's a master. Epic fantasy lets you see him grow and develop over time, so that when he does become a swordsman, it isn't arbitrarily granted power that doesn't matter.

This is a better match to reality than stories where doing something significant takes minimal time and effort. You cannot become a doctor after a week training with a wise old master dispensing cryptic sayings. A successful business doesn't follow a simple rising action, climax, denouement pattern. And as all the writers reading this know, you don't become abruptly published after a sad flashback to your childhood unlocks the author within your soul.

Stories that offer easy paths to the top may appeal to us, but only as fantasies because we know the real world doesn't work that way. Either the successes in those stories ring false, or we absorb a harmfully inaccurate view of work and success. Epic fantasy has the opportunity to model a more realistic path to anything meaningful.

Skills are the clearest example, but there are other things that can be earned as well. A short story can capture the feeling of the horror of war, but getting across the grinding devastation takes more time (Deadhouse Gates, anyone?). Politics don't have to be over-simplified and more complex solutions can be included. Relationships are more authentic when we see the characters grow over time. Not everything needs to be earned, but in the categories where that' s necessary, epics have additional weight.

Looking back, this post is a little scattered. Perhaps that's appropriate: epic fantasy isn't about just one thing, it's vignettes and character studies and detours that together form stories that can truly be called epic.

Many of you may be thinking of epic fantasy that doesn't meet these ideals, and that's true. There have been series that are just the Armies of Good defeating the Armies of Evil - merely taking a long time to do it. But those are imitations, capturing the form of an epic but not the substance. It's the series that take advantage of the strengths of epic fantasy that will be remembered.

Fulfilling Your Promises to the Reader

Ever had a favorite TV show that didn’t pan out in the end? I have, a couple of times. In many cases this is because ratings went down and the production company decides it’s time to wrap things up, so the screenwriters slap something together. That’s typical. But what about a series that was planned from the start, the producers knew it would go on for X number of seasons and then it would end? You’d think they’d be better at keeping their ducks in a row. Not always.

A very much enjoyed show jilted me in the end, as a viewer. Every season they built up expectations that the two main characters had this great destiny and would change the course of the world. All the characters’ hopes built on that, every episode plot arc made sure to make mention of this fact. Decisions were based on it, lives changed. Then we got to the final season, tension building, the climax happening, and…the pivotal main character died. And the other main character faded into the shadows. There was a brief, well-the-world-went-on scene with a secondary character taking the helm. So disappointed. In fact, I felt lied to. The writers not only dropped the ball, they ran over it with a steam-roller.

The same thing has been known to happen in fiction. A writer writes a book that is then built into a series. Now, if the story wasn’t originally intended to be more than one book, the writer has something of a problem, which we can talk about another time. On the other hand, if the writer intended a series all along, they have to make sure they don’t disappoint the reader.

In an epic series, no matter the genre, there is a main story arc. This is the epic problem for the length of the series. It’s introduced in the first book, but not resolved until the last. Each volume of the series should have individual arcs that are spawned from or interact with the main problem, each volume having a sense of resolution at the end.

I’ve picked up a series, been intrigued by the overall arc to have to read each book in the series. It’s the glue that holds my interest, even if it seems to take ages to get to, or I don’t care about the individual arc of a particular volume in the series. A good main arc will do that. Writers should take care that the individual arcs are just as good and engaging, that the writer isn’t stringing readers along for the sake of producing more books.

Reader expectations need to be a consideration, especially when the writer is the one who set the bar and created those expectations. If a main character is destined to be king, they should end up as king. If someone is haunted by a horrible past, we expect to see reactions, situations, and problems arise from that past. Each volume in a series should be tight, propelling the reader toward that main arc’s resolution. It’s okay to have a twist or two, which alters the main arc’s expectations, but not at the last minute because the writer wrote himself into a corner and couldn’t figure out how to get out, or because he got tired of writing the series or about those characters.

 

Going back to the TV show scenario, in a recent interview the producers of the show said they had their ending figured out early on and knew the main character would die and be succeeded by the secondary character. While it may have been an attempt to assuage angry fans, I think it fanned the flames. Why? Because while yes, they did build up the secondary character to be a believable successor for the main character, they still continued to ply the audience with promises of a great future for the two main characters. Huge mistake. If a major change was in order, they needed to stop making those promises and show how decisions and events were altering the main arc.

Probably the best way to examine a main plot arc and make sure that each volume in a series is pulling its weight is to do a simple outline. Make a note next to each volume’s summary as to how it moves the main arc forward or changes it. Lay the groundwork for changes so they don’t come off as convenient escapes for the writer. Make sure you have enough material to cover your projected number of books in the series. If not, trim the number down. And above all, make sure you’re not going to disappoint your audience with your ending. The ending in a series should still be a contrast and a reflection on the beginning of the series.

Writers who have planned for these things tend to have happier readers. Now if we could get more TV producers and screenwriters to do the same…

Blog Spotlights #26: Dragons, Aliens, and Wraiths, Oh My!

It's been a fantastic month for guest posts. I thank everyone who contributed to my blog and who gave me an opportunity to share on theirs. To wrap up the month, I'd like to spotlight the official blog of the Speculative Fiction Group from Agent Query Connect. If you've enjoyed the guest posts on Yesternight's Voyage this month, you'll want to bookmark Dragons, Aliens, and Wraiths, Oh My! for more great post by this remarkable group of writers. The blog is speculative fiction bent. You can sign up for their handy newsletter to get new blogposts in your email feed.

What I think I've enjoyed most about this blog is the range of experience and advice from people who come from all different walks of life and who write in different speculative genres. Some of the most recent posts include:

Murder for Fun and Profit (self-editing)
Writer's Troubles for the Holidays
Antagonists: Who, Why, and When
Action Sequences As Seen by T.J.

Plus more. Check it out.

 

Guest Post: When Longer Books Work

I'd like to welcome another Speculative Fiction Group member to Yesternight's Voyage today.

Robert Courtland writes epic fantasy tales from his home in Colorado at the foot of the majestic Rocky Mountains. His main goal in writing is to bring something new to epic fantasy. In his first novel, Counterpoint to Chaos, he created an Asian inspired setting and inserted a young woman from Pakistan as the heroine. Look for Counterpoint to Chaos at Amazon, Barnes & Noble, iTunes, Kobo, and Smashwords. Visit Robert’s website for the latest updates on what he is writing.

To continue the question of word count from last week, here we go:

Fiction comes to us in many lengths, from the flash fiction stories that are barely a page to the great epic tales that play out over multiple books and millions of words. When done right, stories are enjoyable to read at any length. But the longer the story is the easier and more likely a writer will include things in the final draft that serve no purpose and often only end up boring the reader. The structure and content of a story is very much related to its length and a story won’t work if it is built on the wrong structure.

That brings me to the dark horse of most of the publishing world, novels with high word counts. How do these authors justify such lengthy stories? They exist in many genres, but only in speculative fiction are the longer lengths books truly the norm and there is a very good reason for that. To justify having a longer story, the story needs to be grander and unable to be told with fewer words. My examples are from epic fantasy, but they apply to any successful story in the neighborhood of 150,000 words or more.

One of the first things about speculative fiction is a broad and varied world to set the story in. J.R.R. Tolkien spent years creating the world of Middle Earth from tidbits of Finish and English myths and legends and a good bit of his own imagination. He created parts of it in the trenches in WWI. Twenty years later he penned The Hobbit and then fifteen years after that he finished The Lord of the Rings. That is a bit extreme, but such thorough work meant Tolkien knew his world intimately. Writers of historical fiction do this same thing through research, but for speculative fiction writers, it requires far more imagination than research.

Another thing is a vast scope to the story. Kings and commoners, humans and elves (or aliens), good and evil, war and peace all work to add to the scope. On the surface, The Lord of the Rings is about the quest to destroy the One Ring, but doing so leads from Hobbiton to Rivendell and eventually to Mordor. It becomes a slight of hand where the battle for Minis Tirith and the attack on the gates of Mordor serve to distract the enemy from the real mission as two lone Hobbits journey into the heart of Mordor to the only place where the One Ring can be destroyed. This is not a story that can be told in fewer words. It is intricate and complex with little that could be trimmed without compromising the whole. The movie adaption really showed this in the difference between the theatrical version and the extended versions. The restored scenes add so much to the story.

Another hallmark is an intimacy with the characters. With such a length of story we spend more time with each of the characters and we get to know them even better. We journey with them through their trials and sometimes as they die. We become more emotionally invested. It serves to make these epic tales more real and personal. Carol Berg did this excellently in her debut Rai-Kirah trilogy as we follow one man, initially a slave, as he discovers his destiny. After three 170,000 word novels, he is like an old friend.

Probably the most extreme example of a truly epic tale has just come to a close with the publication of its final volume. The Wheel of Time by Robert Jordan (posthumously completed by Brandon Sanderson) spans fourteen volumes and nearly 4.5 million words. It brings up a benefit to publishing long novels. That output in other genres would yield over forty separate books, but condensing it to just fourteen books that average 300,000 words, the author takes fewer publishing slots and the reader has to buy fewer books. It also leads to a more immersive experience.

It can all so easily go wrong. Fortunately, thanks to the publishers, we have rarely seen those blunders (though they may be more common as self-publishing takes off). A few make it to print, some by very esteemed writers, and they are a cautionary tale of how one or more of the things I’ve mentioned have gone wrong. Usually it is that the scope of the story fails or that too much extraneous material remains in the published edition.

 
The best way to avoid the pitfalls is to do what most writers do and that is read, and read a lot. Knowing your genre and what the premier writers in your genre do is the best class anyone could ask for. If you want to write epic fantasy, read J.R.R. Tolkien, Terry Brooks, Stephen R. Donaldson, George R.R. Martin, Robert Jordan, Melanie Rawn, Carol Berg, and Brandon Sanderson. If you want to write space opera, read Isaac Asimov, Robert Heinlein, Arthur C. Clark, Frank Herbert, David Brin, and Jack McDevitt. After getting to know the masters, you will know how a new writer stacks up.

Guest Post: What Justifies a Larger Word Count In Speculative Fiction. And What Doesn't.

 Today's Guest Blog Post comes from author, Aaron Bradford Starr, a fellow Speculative Fiction Group member. Aaron's published short stories, paintings, and interior art in Black Gate Magazine, Black Gate Online, and Stupefying Stories. Follow him on his blog, Imaginary Friend or on Twitter. 

I was visiting with my old friend, Joyce, one summer, when the subject of word count came up. We were sitting on the veranda of her chrysanthemum plantation, after a leisurely day of beekeeping, and I happened to mention I’d recently finished my current manuscript. After a round of congratulations, she inquired as to its length, and was horrified when I answered it was 200K, give or take. Setting down her mint lemonade with trembling hands, she composed herself.

“Surely you can whittle that down, in the next draft? Eliminating about half the book should just about do it!” It is to her credit she didn’t rub her hands together in anticipation, being, as she was at the time, in the throes of a stint with flash fiction and haiku. The opportunity to assist in editing such a work as mine had her mentally sharpening her reddest pencil in anticipation.

I shook my head. “No, I think it’s about right. A little tightening, perhaps, is called for, but it’s the right length for the story it tells.”

“But think of the trees!” she exclaimed, waving to the stately oaks that stood in the distance, across the fields. “No environmentally conscious agent would ever represent such a behemoth.”

“Ah, but the speculative fiction genres tend to run longer than others,” I reminded her.

“Poppycock!” she responded, then amended herself. “Well, some authors do. But new authors must keep under 115K, or so. At least for their first novel.”

“I suppose,” I said. “But can you not think of any legitimate reasons why a novel might be allowed to run long?”

Taking up her tea once more, she leaned back into her wicker chair, considering, and we sat awhile, the only sound the wind across the fields, carrying to us the scent of flowers. “Well,” she said at last, “the setting itself might need more visual description than in other genres.”

I nodded, thinking of my lovingly crafted vistas. “Yes, yes!” I agreed. “The setting is a primary way to invite the reader into your new world. A believable, vivid setting will go a long way toward suspending the reader’s disbelief.”

“True,” Joyce said. “And once the magic or SF-stuff gets into full gear, you can always fall back on the setting. The way the world reacts to your imaginary dangers and resolutions does make it easier to support the completely impossible, I would think.”

“So you agree, then?”

“Not so fast!” she said, fixing me with the calculating gaze that has set so many authors to flight. I swallowed, taking an unsteady sip of my tea.

“What about keeping your writing tight?” she asked. “Lean and mean?”

“You can do that,” I said, thinking furiously. “I fact, my first novel, which I’ve since split up into a trilogy due to it’s very great size, had exactly this quality. The first draft was entirely too fast, for all of its length. I actually had to add in as much as I took out, and a bit more besides, in the following drafts. Speculative fiction needs to carefully control the pace. Readers must be allowed to process the new before more is piled on, and this is most easily done by exploring a bit of the familiar in between.”

Joyce nodded, mulling this over. “Yes,” she allowed. “I suppose that’s true. Sometimes, slowing down the pace a bit is necessary.” Her eyes widened in outrage. “But not with fluff!”

“No, never,” I agreed quickly. “You can do so with exploring the character’s personalities, or the setting, as we agreed before.”

“Maybe,” she said, scowling. “But I still think that seventeen syllables should be sufficient for anyone.” As someone who wrote the definitive haiku version of Lord of the Rings, I couldn’t argue her point too directly, so I tried another tack.

“But if the reader’s interest is held, nay, embraced, by a longer work, is word count actually a problem?” I asked. “Length isn’t always bloat, as we’ve agreed. Now, multiplying these considerations with complex plots, a longer work might well be necessary.”

“True,” she said. “But that isn’t license to lollygag with literary bric-a-brac! It’s still better to err on the side of brevity.”

“If an error is necessary,” I agreed, relieved at our accord.

“An error is always necessary, in fiction,” Joyce said, sipping her tea. She waved a hand at the fields before us. “With the petals of these chrysanthemums, I make the finest red pencils in the world. And where would my fortune go, if not for the endless errors of authors?”

“Where indeed?” I asked, and we clinked glasses, settling in to watch the sun set over the distant trees.

Guest Post: Adding Genre Without Switching Genre

Today's guest blogpost comes from Eli Ashpence, author and fellow Speculative Fiction Group Member. She is the author of Genocide to Genesis:

"Eighty years after World War Three, the immortal Val is one of the few who lives long enough to see the modern world of science crumble into a medieval world of magic."

"The world can change in a matter of minutes. No one knows this better than Val, a life-sucking immortal who wanders the world in search of amusements. The latest, in a city twisted by fallout, is the role of "Vampire Val, Private Detective." But no diversion is lasting enough when the Earth itself incites a massive apocalypse - one that Val has to live through and, possibly, learn from."

Without further ado:

"Adding Genre without Switching Genre" might sound simple on the surface.  It's a little romance in your fantasy or a little erotica in your horror.  It's a little mystery in your sci-fi and a little crime in your paranormal.  But where does an author draw the line?  How can you stop your Alternate-History/Dystopia from turning into a mess of A.History/ Dystopia/ Inspirational/ LGBT?

I'll try to answer this with the experience I've gained from crossing that line.  First, and foremost, you must decide on a primary and secondary genre.  Planners usually decide this during their outline phase.  Pantsters (those that write by the seat of their pants) should have some idea by chapter 3. 

You'd be surprised—or maybe not—at how many writers don't decide their genre until they're ready to query an agent or publisher.  I know I didn't think of it until after I wrote my first novel.  I just wanted to see what would happen next with Character X in Setting Y. However, it makes everything easier when this “little detail” is written in stone. 

Mostly, knowing your primary and secondary genres ahead of time will allow you to better recognize when you're deviating.  And THAT allows you to pick and choose which genres will benefit the story rather than distracting from it.

(This is also why you only list your primary and secondary in your query letter.  You don't want agents and publishers to think your writing lacks focus.)

This is where you say, “Get to the point!  How do you add genre without switching your genre?”

I'm assuming you already know what genre you want to add.  And, for that, there are two *main* methods to consider.  Those are:

1.  Ommission:  I'm not trying to punk you.  This IS an option.  Try to explain the story (to yourself) with the extra genre thrown in.  If it's overload when you try to explain it, then it'll be overload when you write it.  So, don't write it.  Pick two genres (primary and secondary) and stick with them.  This method is usually suited for planners that can stick to an outline. 

2.  Side Stories:  Whatever tertiary genres you pick to add to your story should be relegated to side stories.  This will keep your main genre clear by keeping your main plot-line clear.  I believe this method is suited for pansters that don't bother writing outlines.  As an added bonus, side stories are easier to edit out than trying to remove details integrated into the core plot.

Of course, no one method is 'one size fits all'.  If it were, this would be a rather short post and Clipper would hide my cookies. 

Other options to add genre:

3.      Contrivances:  Every story has minor items/things that don't quite fit, but aren't genre-breaking.  For example, a magic mirror in a sci-fi/horror, or a jet pack in an erotica/romance, or buying a magic charm in a mystery/western.  These are good for adding the flavor of a different genre without adding the entire genre.  Sometimes, this is all an author needs to soothe the craving for 'more'.

4.      Settings:  Dream settings are the most commonly used to add another genre.  However, there are also paintings, books within the world, and distant lands/planets/amusement parks that can be mentioned in passing.  Again, sometimes the mention is enough.

And that's it!  Did you expect something else?  Maybe you thought I was  going to come in here and list fifty ways for you to salvage your horror/crime/urban fantasy/romance?  How about just one?

5.      Simplifying Fractions:  (Horror/Crime*urban fantasy/romance = Crime/Urban Fantasy) Make sense?  It's important to know the expectations within genres.  No matter how horrific crime becomes, it's still crime.  And most fantasies (of any type) include some kind of romance.  The important part is to identify what genre is most inclusive to all aspects of your novel. Everything else is just gravy. 

Although.... too much gravy can make you sick.  ^_^

Further Reading:

Genre Shift: http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/GenreShift

Wikipedia's Genre List:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_genres

Blog Spotlights #25: Everything Speculative Fiction

Technically, Everything Speculative Fiction, is more of an online newsletter than a blog. But it links to blogposts, articles, and other current updates from many sources, all in one convenient location. Edited by Kimiko, aka @kimidreams on Twitter.

Topics include: Stories, Education, Art & Entertainment, Leisure, Society, Technology, #kidlitcares. There are also videos of interviews, book signings, and links to book related news articles.

You can subscribe to the newsletter and follow updates on Twitter.

Pop on over and check it out.
 

Which Type of Epic Are You?

Type 1: Episodic
Episodic fiction has a main base of characters and each book in the series acts as a standalone. New book, new big problem or antagonist. Usually not so epic in size compared to the other two types. Can have an overall arc tying all the books together.

Type 2: Generational
Generational fiction changes up characters as time passes. These can also easily work as standalones with a stronger overall arc. There is a big story behind the scenes that encompasses a long period of time.

Type 3: True Epic
True epics are large stories, very large stories. So large that they can't be condensed into a single volume or even two. They often fail as standalones because resolving the main conflict introduced at the beginning cuts the whole thing off at the toes. They can have mini-arcs to make each volume have a somewhat standalone feel. The driving force for readership is the main arc, which stays an active, in-the-front plot player through each volume and isn't resolved until the end of the last installment.

Pros:
Type 1 and 2 are easier to sell if you're an unpublished writer. Less of a gamble for publishers.
Type 1 isn't locked into one main doom or conflict, giving the writer room to try out different plots and situations.
Type 1 doesn't have a definitive end until the writer gets tired of playing in that world. You can end up with a few books in the series, or several. Readers can also jump in or out of the series where ever they like.
Type 2 gives the writer a chance to change up the characters while keeping to a central plot line. The writer is less likely to tire of their characters.
Type 2 writers also get to change up their settings and time periods. Lots of great world-building opportunities.
Type 3 stories satisfy a certain demographic of devoted reader who will come back for more and who crave larger, meatier books.
Type 1 and 3 stories allow a writer to share a more complex, richly detailed world over the span of the series.

Cons:
Type 1 stories can lose readers at any time, without a lure to keep them reading future books. Readers can get tired of the same characters if they aren't well done. Not an easy thing to keep up for several books.
Type 2 stories can fall into a rut if the same plot twists and consequences creep up. There is room for a lot of unnecessary bloat here, whether it's a lot of new characters to learn with each book, info dumping, or other fillers if the story isn't really that epic. Are you writing Type 2 for the sake of racking up the number of books and time periods, instead?
Type 3 stories are hard to sell for unpublished writers. Publishers don't want to take a gamble on someone untried in the marketplace. And if the first volume of an epic doesn't sell well, there won't be a number two, and that leads to dissatisfied readers...
Type 3 stories are hard to write well. A lot of unpolished manuscripts are bloated with info dumping, long passages with nothing going on, and a hoard of characters. In short, these manuscripts are trying to be true epics but they don't really have enough story to pass the test.
Type 3 writers, once published, get a lot of pressure from readers to churn out the next volume in record time. Some readers won't even pick up the novel until all of the volumes are published. Others, too impatient to wait, stop reading altogether. A good percentage of readers hate cliffhanger endings.

Which type are you? Which type(s) do you enjoy reading? How patient are you as a reader?
 

The Epic Quest Begins

I see it more and more, writers of epic speculative fiction having the devil of a time trying to find representation for their work. Few agents come out and say in their guidelines "Send me epic _______ fiction." The blogosphere is noisy with the YA-loving crowd and their parameters. It's hard to do research for epic speculative fiction because the people who work with it or write it aren't a dominate presence online (collectively.)

So I'm embarking on a quest to find out as much information as I can. I'll share my findings here on the blog and if you've done some research, please share also.

By epic, I'm referring to:
Huge, door-stopper books that are standalones; also series, sagas, and trilogies of epic proportions. These are books where there is a lot of story/plot, often with multiple POVs, and they take place in fantastic worlds or settings. See also this blogpost: Where are the massive epic science fiction series? Also you can pull up "epic" lists off of Goodreads or even Amazon (although take them with a grain of salt because the books listed are based off where readers categorize them.)

My first step was to comb online looking for authors of epic novels and to write them down on a spreadsheet. I came up over 200 names from my first gleaning alone and I'm sure I'll find a lot more. Finding so many authors cheered me up because it proves people will read long series and fat books. Some of the authors are dead, some are long-time veterans, but quite a few are new and thriving. There is a market for this kind of fiction.

I also noticed that epic authors tend to use initials; that there are a lot of Davids, Richards, and Kates; and that both male and female authors came up about even in body count on my list. Epic fantasy outnumbers epic science-fiction or epic paranormal. Epic YA speculative fiction gets a lot of the limelight these days but don't discount the adult crowd just yet.

Some websites that deal with epic speculative fiction:
Locus Magazine
TOR.com
Epic Fantasy Books Blog

What are your favorite epic books and your favorite epic-writing authors? Help me refine my list so I can move on to stage two: identifying publishers and agents (if applicable.) I hope to have a good-sized list of websites and blogs by epic authors next time for you.

Genre Identified #7: Hard Science Fiction

In short, hard science fiction is where modern day science and scientific understanding is used in a modern or futuristic setting. There are no fantastical trappings from pseudo science or science we wish was fact. Actual, concrete science is the name of the game. And sticking to straight facts increases the level of suspense in a hard science-fiction story.

For further reading on the definition:
Science Fiction Subgenres, Hard Science Fiction
Technology Review, The Best Hard Science Fiction Books of All Time
Mike Brotherton Hard SF Writer, Ten Issues for Hard Science Fiction
Goodreads, Popular Hard Science Fiction Books list
Hard Science Fiction website and forum
HardSF.net website and forum

Hard Science Fiction tends to be a male dominated genre in both writers and readers. A personal observation I'd like to point out: most (not all) hard science fiction that I've read tends to balance the science and technology with sex as the counter-weight. And from a writerly perspective, hard science fiction is probably the one speculative genre where info-dumping is expected, though not to an excessive scale. The science and technological advancements are the heart of the story so to have characters deeply engrossed by these things is normal.

Guest Blogger Peter Burton on Why Adult Speculative Fiction Isn't Dead

Joyce has invited me to do a guest post here in Yesternight’s Voyage. I jumped at the opportunity. It is always a great vote of confidence when a fellow writer offers you a chance to guest on their blog.

Joyce had several options for the post; why adult speculative fiction is not dead, and who some of the great authors of speculative fiction are, to name a couple. To be honest, I can’t separate those two subjects, so this is going to be something of a hybrid.

Since the genre of speculative fiction could be pretty much perceived to cover all fiction ever written, it can get a bit confusing. Technically, Mark Twain’s Huck Finn is just as much speculative fiction as Frank Herbert’s Dune. So, for the sake of this post I’ll just stick to the basics of the genre; Fantasy, Science Fiction, and Horror. I realize that even those genres have been sliced and diced to death, but let’s keep it simple, shall we?

Why is speculative fiction not dead? Because it is the genre that covers some of the most basic needs in humanity. Our need to romanticize the past, Fantasy; our need to speculate on the future, Science Fiction; and our need to be scared, Horror.

That last bit may seem a bit silly to a few people, but it is the truth. We love to be scared and will go to great lengths to feed that fix. Just look at the lines for the rollercoasters, and all the scary rides at any amusement park. I’m not even going to mention base jumping, white water rafting, or bungee jumping. We like getting the bejesus scared out of us from time to time.

That would partially explain why adult speculative fiction is still alive and well, but I don’t think it’s the entire reason. No genre can continue without great stories, and great stories come from great authors. Even if their status happens to be a one hit wonder. Both Mary Shelly and Bram Stoker fall into that category, as far as the general public goes, yet Dracula and Frankenstein are still read, and the fodder of pop culture media to this very day. Steven King is the long term superstar of the horror brand of speculative fiction.

How many people do you know who don’t know King Arthur and the Knights of the Round Table, or Merlin? There is some speculation that those people might have come from actual historic persons, but the truth is, the story as we know it is Fantasy. How does that fit into today, you may ask? Look at the number of adults who devoured J.K. Rowling’s Harry Potter series. Although not of the Sword and Sorcery brand, it is undeniably Fantasy.

Science Fiction is, and has pretty much always been something of a juggernaut under the speculative fiction umbrella. The ongoing popularity of Jules Verne’s works, such as The Time Machine and 20,000 Leagues Under The Sea, right up to The afore mentioned Dune is proof enough of that. If that isn’t enough, we didn’t even mention the works of Isaac Asimov, or the recently departed great Ray Bradbury. These two giants of the genre have achieved legendary status, and I’ve no doubt their work will live on for millennia to come.

So far we have only touch the big three in speculative fiction, and I think we’ve made a pretty good case that the genre as a whole is still alive and kicking. If not then consider the popularity New York Times bestselling authors under the new sub-genres of SF such as Laurell Hamilton’s Anita Blake series (Paranormal Urban Fantasy), and Lisa Myers’s Twilight series (Paranormal Romance). Both of which are clearly adult in nature.

Yes. I would say it is more than safe to say Speculative Fiction is alive as a viable market, and will be for many years to come… if not indefinitely.

Thanks for giving me a chance to mouth off on your blog, Joyce. I am more than grateful for the opportunity. And as usual;

Later Gang.

Genre Identified #6: Historical Speculative Fiction

A historical speculative fiction novel takes place in an actual period of Earth's history and can be historical fantasy, historical science-fiction, historical paranormal, historical horror, etc. So you can take Speculative Fiction back to the stone age, ancient times, medieval times, clear up to near modern times. Characters and conflicts may be fictional or actual historical figures, as long as the setting and basic world building are in a familiar time period.
Many works written in olden times are now often classified under the "historical" speculative fiction stamp, even though at that time, they were the equivalent of say - urban fantasy, contemporary science-fiction, or horror. Tales such as Dracula, Frankenstein, The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes, 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea, etc.

One recently popular branch of historical speculative fiction is Steampunk, taking place in Victorian times with science-fiction elements to it, and in some cases, also paranormal. Steampunk also is within the fringe of Alternate History.

Another historical spec fiction favorite are Arthurian Fantasies which retell the legend of King Arthur and Camelot in a distinctive time period.

Yet another is the Gothic novel: "a traditional form depicting the encroachment of the Middle Ages upon the 18th century Enlightenment, filled with images of decay and ruin, and episodes of imprisonment and persecution." (The 2009 Guide To Literary Agents)

For further reference:
Goodreads Popular Historical Fantasy Novels list
Goodreads Historical Paranormal Romance list
Library Journal's Steampunk: 20 Core Titles
Steampunk.com: What is Steampunk?
The Gothic Novel
A list of Arthurian Fiction by the Syosset Public Library

Genre Identified #5: Dark Fantasy

From the 2009 Guide To Literary Agents: "Dark Fantasy (are) tales that focus on the nightmarish underbelly of magic, venturing into the violence of horror novels."

Dark fantasy isn't confined to modern times. It can take place in the here and now, in another world, or in the past. Based on the definition above, there are still valid questions regarding whether a particular manuscript falls under the Dark Fantasy classification or another. What about paranormal romance? Or a horror story involving magic?

Compare a vampire tale that is mostly love-story, versus one that dives into the violence and dark magical rules as the main staples for the story. Or a horror story with elements of magic realism versus a postively magical tale that walks on the dark side and characters come by horrible ends. There is a difference. What a writer needs to do is analyze their story and decide what the ruling factors are. The horrific violence plus the dark magic would qualify it for a Dark Fantasy label. If those aren't the main points, then you can safely label your story in another subgenre.

For further reference, may I suggest:
Dark Fantasy: sub-genre or marketing ploy? from the Speculative Book Review blog.
Writing: What is Dark Fantasy? from the blog of Colleen Anderson
What is Dark Fantasy as a genre? from the blog of Colin F. Barnes: Author
Goodreads Dark Fantasy book list

Genre Identified #4: Dystopian

It’s a hot trend right now, especially in YA markets (never mind all the Hunger Games buzz going on…) but what exactly is dystopian fiction?

If you know what utopian fiction is, think the opposite for starters. (I’ll spotlight utopian in another post.) Dystopians take place in the future, near or far, in a drastically changed world from what we currently know. They take the question “what if?” and really play with it, exploring consequences of either natural, political, social, or technological fall-outs or take-overs. Dystopian falls under the bracket of science-fiction. Pseudo-science creeps in often into these stories as well.

From the 2009 Guide To Literary Agents: “…stories that portray a bleak future world. Stories where the apocalypse occurs, whether in the form of a nuclear bomb, asteroids, disease, or even a political regime, fit this genre.”

And here’s a bang-up breakdown of the characteristics of a dystopian world from readywritethink.org

For another great breakdown, here is a blog post by writer Meagan Spooner that adds even more clarity.

Looking for comparative examples? Here is Goodreads Best Utopian and Dystopian Fiction list.

Genre Identified #3: Science-Fantasy

This is one of the most confusing, obscure, and misunderstood speculative genres. I like how agent Ginger Clark put it in her interview on Cynsations: "...there is no such genre as sci-fi/fantasy. It's either science-fiction or fantasy. (Unless it's science-fantasy, and I can sense your head is exploding, so never mind!)"

The 2009 Guide to Literary Agents defines science-fantasy this way: "a blend in which fantasy is supported by scientific or pseudo-scientific explanations." I think this is the best definition I've found to-date, simple and precise.

Most people automatically think of Star Wars with it's use of advanced technology plus the mysterious Force. For a more recent and better example might I suggest Brandon Sanderson's Mistborn Series or Warbreaker  where the fantasy elements have pseudo-scientific explanations and rules. When you really get into the explanations and figure out what defines science-fantasy what you discover is that there are a lot of books that straddle science-fiction and fantasy but to really be defined as science-fantasy you can't just throw together laser guns and elves. Many people try to get away with defining their work as sci-fi/fantasy without having the actual pseudo-science involved and the fantasy elements that make up the difference to replace realism.

World-building wise, you can have a futuristic or current setting, or a medieval one. Science-fantasy straddles the genres here. Races, languages, customs, and what-not are also fair game. What isn't is the science and fantasy melding that makes and breaks the rules of your world. Without that, then yes, you've got a sorry hodge-podge sci-fi/fantasy Frankenstein that will be very hard to define unless it plays into the direct rules of some other speculative subgenre. Don't classify it as science-fantasy and never use the term sci-fi/fantasy in a query letter.

The debates are heated; especially among purists who'd either resign all science-fiction with fantasy elements to a junk pit which they designate as science-fantasy or would rather ignore the subgenre all-together. Regardless of how they feel, it is a valid subgenre, recognized by both the publishing and movie industry. Defining it is trickier and writing science-fantasy on purpose isn't as easy as one might think.

Now for some links to showcase the debate, to define, and to help you understand:

Fantasy Magazine does a wonderful job defining the three levels of science-fiction (of which science-fantasy is #3) in this article.

John Scalzi writes regarding the negative attribution of calling some films science-fantasy vs. science-fiction when in fact both are subgenres of fantasy, so there you go. Fun read, even if it blurs the lines a bit more.

The SF Site lists several main genres and subgenres of speculative fiction, including science-fantasy for a brief, clear-cut explanation.

There's even a Science-Fantasy fan page on Facebook you can like! And yes, they have an explanation regarding the subgenre too.

On Tia Nevitt's blog Heather Massey guest posts regarding science-fantasy and makes some very valid points.

Intergalactic Academy sheds even more light on what is science-fantasy here.

After researching a bit, can you think of a good example of a science-fantasy book that you've read? Share it in the comments.

Genre Identified #2: Steampunk

Steampunk ranges close to Alternate History in that is is a type of alternate history, usually around the time period of Victorian England in which the civilizations then have access to more modern technology. Sometimes this technology ranges amid the fantastical but overall, it tends to lean towards science-fiction rather than fantasy. Paranormal-romance in a steampunk setting has been popular lately, which shows that steampunk can genre-hop and is by no means locked in to a tight parameter.

The Galaxy Express has a great article on steampunk and gives some examples of the genre.

Goodreads list of Best Steampunk books.

Tor.com hosts The Steampunk Workshop with articles, book examples, and such to help you understand the genre more.

Do you write or read steampunk? What's your favorite steampunk novel or author?

Genre Identified #1: The Subgenre of Alternate History

To quote directly from The 2009 Guide to Literary Agents: "speculative fiction that changes the accepted account of actual historical events, often featuring a profound "what if?" premise"

This subgenre crosses between speculative fiction and historical fiction. It uses actual history and forces it down a road it didn't actually go, whether introducing alternate technologies, different outcomes, choices made or not made, or introducing fictional characters into the mix. Alternate history, because it crosses two major genres, has the potential for a wide fan base.

Examples and Resources:
Alternate History Directory has a large list of fiction, essays, short stories, and such.
Uchronia: The Alternate History List is another great resource.
Flashlight Worthy posts a book list of The Best Earths That Never Were
io9 shares a brief history of alternate history fiction.
Goodreads has a listing of books classified as alternate history.

Alternate history shouldn't be confused with time travel stories, though they are very close. Time travel stories are a separate sister subgenre which I'll cover later on.