/lit/ - Literature

What hilarity!

SF/F authors, being possessed of higher than average IQ than the general authorial populace, would typically use an agent; were they attempting to break in via slush pile, they would target SF/F specific publishing houses.

I call baloney on your tale, sir, and submit that it is an invention based solely on the Penn Jillette homeschooling forced meme from /pol/ and not your actual experiences.

What's so bad about sci-fi?

>implying anyone important enough to make decisions about what manuscript does and doesn't get published would browse 4chan
>implying an entire genre can be bad

Yeah whatever, dude

>>3589396

nothing OP is just reposting a troll.

>>3589351

>>3589405
Sci-fi sucks, bro.

But, yes, OP is a troll reposter.

>work at publishers
>only ever really correct spelling errors.

Not much else we do generally. Used to be that editors could completely change a novel, many great pieces of literature have been heavily altered by editors. Nowadays it is just correcting grammatical errors and punctuation.

>>3589448
>many great pieces of literature have been heavily altered by editors

examples?

>>3589450

Hard to point to examples but here's an article on the matter.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2011/feb/11/lost-art-editing-books-publishing

>Throwing away the 1984 manuscript
Shiggy.

>>3589466
Nineteen Eighty-four (not "1984") is Futurist literature, not "science fiction".

>>3589466
>Throwing away Ray Bradbury, H. G. Wells, and Authur C. Clarke

>>3589466
Meh. It's not like the book really helped us.

>>3589477
Bradbury was a straight hack

Wells was Futurist, not sci-fi

Clarke was a Savile-tier boy molester who moved to Sri Lanka to fulfill his fantasies

>>3589474
Nope. 1984 is sci-fi.

Enders Game is alternative-planetary literature, not "science fiction".

>>3589477
>Throwing away Kurt Vonnegut, William Gibson, and Philip K Dick

>>3589483
>Throwing away Frederik Pohl, Aldous Huxley, and Robert Heinlein.

>>3589488
Throwing away Isaac Asimov, George R. Stewart, and John Wyndham.

>>3589488
Huxley sucks.

>>3589491
>Throwing away William Golding, Anthony Burgess, and Gene Wolfe

>>3589483
Sounds good. Gibson and PDK are, despite the best claims of their apologists, pure junk. Vonnegut wrote one good novel. Then just became a grouchy crank who thought that every belch he erupted was worthy of being printed. No, sir. I wouldn't care if Vonnegut completely disappeared into the trash-bin of oblivion.

>>3589495
>>3589491
>>3589488
>>3589483
>>3589477
>>3589466
>implying all of this shit shouldn't be tossed in le garbage

>>3589493
>Huxley sucks.

I'm totally convinced. Very cogent argument!

>>3589495
>Throwing away Alfred Bester, William S. Burroughs, and Charles L. Harness.

ITT: OP gets fired when the rival publishers pick up all his rejected manuscripts.

>>3589483
>>3589488
>>3589495
>>3589503
>Jackasses implying that Vonnegut, Huxley, Golding, Burgess, Burroughs
>Couldn't be bothered to actually to put down their usual fantacrap and actually read these authors' works.
>mfw

SPARTANS! PREPARE FOR GLORY!

Sci-fi is going to come back with a vengeance within the next twenty years, and you are fucked when that time comes around.

>>3589351
>Into le trash it goes

>>>/pol/

>>3589521
This. Sci-fi, the literature of technology rather than characters, will become the only form of literature after the singularity

>>3589543
Haaaa