Annie wrote:
Of course, back then, it wasn't as easy to photocopy things *and* we had to run off zines in 200-300 copies
at a
time just to get a decent print price. So, anyone cutting in to your potential sales could be potential cause for alarm.
I considered publishing some "mixed" issues of my own zines, mostly from urgings of people like Jane Carnall who objected to non-explicit stories being relegated to adult zines simply because they featured homosexual relationships. I happen to agree with her that it wasn't fair. But I also
had
to look at how such a move would affect my sales. I was still operating,
at
that time, under the rule of having to print a minimum print run of 200 zines. If I mixed *gasp* slash stories in with the gen, even if they were non-explicit, I ran the risk of missed sales. Not that the slash zines didn't/don't sell well on their own.
This decision of yours is interesting. From the sound of it, you're basically ghettoising _all_ stories about gay relationships into slash zines, and I would like to ask you why you do this. There were gay characters in the programme, so it can't be out of respect for the canon; since you yourself are involved in a same-sex relationship, it can't be out of a belief that all fiction involving gays should be kept on the X-rated shelf. Apparently it's just down to sales, and again I'd like more evidence that it _would_ harm sales-- the people who wouldn't buy the zine might be compensated for by the Jane Carnalls of the world: the people who don't object to fiction about gays, but do object to explicit sex.
Of course, the end result is that people like me wind up convinced that the only gay-related fiction in B7 fandom is essentially pornographic/slash, because even if a zine has non-slash gay stories in there, it's all being marketed under the same label.
This "sales" thing, though, bears closer inspection. You mention the word "sales" and "selling" quite a lot in there. Now I've asked you what your interest in B7 fandom is-- it doesn't seem to be the programme, since you don't get involved in the speculative threads on it; it can't be a fondness for the actors, for reasons mentioned in the thread on who produces and distributes explicit art; it doesn't seem to be the meeting of minds of fans of similar interests, since you don't seem to enjoy rational discussion about other people's activities and backgrounds. Could it be the profit motive dominates?
Shane
Largo: Why do I feel as if I'm on trial here? Avon: Why do I feel as if you should be?
Who needs Cupid? Matchmaker.com is the place to meet somebody. FREE Two-week Trial Membership at http://www.matchmaker.com/home?rs=200015
Don't worry, Citizens, I have calmed down in the last few months...
In message HFJBPDJKCPPINAAA@angelfire.com, Shane Little littles@angelfire.com writes
This decision of yours is interesting. From the sound of it, you're basically ghettoising _all_ stories about gay relationships into slash zines, and I would like to ask you why you do this. There were gay characters in the programme, so it can't be out of respect for the canon; since you yourself are involved in a same-sex relationship, it can't be out of a belief that all fiction involving gays should be kept on the X-rated shelf. Apparently it's just down to sales, and again I'd like more evidence that it _would_ harm sales-- the people who wouldn't buy the zine might be compensated for by the Jane Carnalls of the world: the people who don't object to fiction about gays, but do object to explicit sex.
Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear.
You've been complaining that straight women are writing about gay men without the least idea of what it's like to be a gay man. Now you're writing about zine editors without displaying any evidence that you have the least idea what it's like to be a zine editor.
Anthology zine editing is a hobby. It's an expensive hobby. Sales *are* important, because the more copies you can sell, the more chance you have of covering a reasonable proportion of the costs involved in putting a zine together. There are fixed costs involved in doing a zine, as well as the per-copy costs, and they can be pretty high for an anthology zine. Profits? Forget them, at least in this fandom. In the unlikely event that someone actually covers *all* the costs, and then some, the pay per hour rate is going to make third world wages look munificent. There are easier ways of making money.
The experience of editors down the years is that there *are* objections, and resulting loss of sales, to mixed zines. From both camps. It's not just the loss of sales, either, it's having to deal with the bitching from people who think that the merest hint that two men (or two women) could have a sexual interest in each other turns it into a filthy pornographic rag; and at the other extreme, the people bitching about having to pay for this boring gen stuff when all they want is the action. Or the ones who want only slash and gen, none of that horrid het (no, I am not exaggerating, I've had the dealer's table experience of people wanting me to tell them how much space was wasted on het before they decided to buy a zine).
Personally, I'm somewhat bemused by the belief that amateur gynaecology and explicit violence are just fine in a genzine but a passing mention of homosexuality is slash and only to be sold to the over-eighteens, but sticking to that market division is one way for an editor to reduce her stress level. I hope ttba continues, because it's the sort of zine I want to buy, but my own experience suggests to me that I'm in the minority.
Julia said:
You've been complaining that straight women are writing about gay men without the least idea of what it's like to be a gay man. Now you're writing about zine editors without displaying any evidence that you have the least idea what it's like to be a zine editor.
Yes, but OTOH there's a lot less discrimination against zine editors.
I hope ttba continues, because it's the sort of zine I want to buy, but my own experience suggests to me that I'm in the minority.
I got my copy as a tribber, but I'd agree that Tavia's editorial approach is one that I applaud and agree with. (However, I have to point out that Neil must know a bit about editing an anthology zine because he's done it twice.)
-(Y)