Editing Anthologies

I received an email a little while ago from John Sargent, giving me some interesting information about CWA anthologies of the past, and also suggesting that I write a post for this blog about the process of editing an anthology. A nice idea, and I’m glad to respond.

Anthologies come in various different forms, and the approach that one takes depends on what the publisher is trying to achieve, and also, needless to say, the budget. And suffice to say that budgets are often very tight indeed.

I’ve been involved with editing four different types of anthology. First, three collections of crime writing by members of the Northern Chapter of the CWA, and one by members of the East Anglian Chapter, which I co-edited with Robert Church. Second, thirteen collections of crime fiction by CWA members not only from the UK but also elsewhere in the world. Third, two collections b members of Murder Squad. And fourth, a “Lost Classics” collection of stories by Ellis Peters, with input from the late Sue Feder, and published by Crippen and Landru.

The approach I’ve taken has varied depending on the type of book, but with the annual CWA volume, I seek contributions from members and wait to see what comes in. I usually aim to have original stories specially written for the book, but occasionally I’ll include a previously published story by a stellar name such as Ruth Rendell.

Publishers like big name contributors, because they help to sell books. But of course it’s very hard to persuade a bestselling writer to write a brand new story for a tiny sum of money when they have little time to spare and anyway, could do far better elsewhere. However, I must say that time and again, major writers have shown a good deal of generosity in their response to requests I’ve made for help. I’ve been very grateful to them - not just Ruth Rendell, by the way, but Colin Dexter, the late Reg Hill, and numerous others.

The tricky bit comes in deciding which stories to include and which to reject. I hate turning down stories, especially if they are written by friends. But it’s impossible to include everything that is submitted, even when it’s of very good quality. I can only hope that people whose stories are not accepted understand the dilemma. In picking stories, I’m looking not just for merit, but for balance and variety. So if I receive three or four stories about spouse-murder or blackmail, for instance, some of them will have to go.

I do have a preference for shorter stories, and those that are unusual. I also pay a lot of attention to submissions from writers who haven’t previously featured in the CWA anthology and from those who are less well-known. The book is a showcase for members, and it should, I think, be a showcase for all types of writers, not just the stars. But above all, of course, one is trying to put together a book that is fresh and entertaining, and that readers will enjoy.

Editing an anthology

I promised to talk about the art of putting together an anthology - so here goes. Of course, I claim no special expertise, but after editing seventeen anthologies, and being invited to contribute to a good many others over the years, at least I do have experience!

My own preference tends to be for anthologies that have a connecting theme or link of some kind. This helps to give a bit of shape to what might otherwise be shapeless. But I don’t tend to obsess about the theme. ‘Perfect crimes’ or ‘Identity’ are themes that can encompass a remarkably wide range of stories.

Variety does seem to me to be important. The risk is that a reader may like some stories more than others. But that is inevitable. The key is to try to include good stories, so that even if some readers aren’t bowled over by one story, others will be. And variety includes variety of length. Sometimes I include pretty short stories, sometimes much longer ones, though never anything above 10,000 words.

It’s great fun to receive and read the stories. Crime writers, I’ve found, are very generous. I like to include stories by overseas writers when I can, and I also like the idea of mixing star names with unfamiliar names, and relative newcomers. The only part of the process that I hate is rejecting stories. None of us likes rejection, and I don’t like inflicting it. But it’s unavoidable, because every time, I receive more stories than there is space. To reject a story does not imply fault within the story itself, and I do try to make that clear to the authors concerned. I can only hope they understand the dilemma.

I love writing short stories, and I love reading them too. I’ve been especially thrilled when stories I’ve selected have gone on to win prizes – CWA Daggers, an Edgar, a Barry, and many nominations over the years. These honours give me a vicarious sense of satisfaction. But even more rewarding is the privilege of having been the first to see some masterly stories by the likes of Ian Rankin, Lawrence Block, Edward D. Hoch, Reginald Hill and so on. For a crime fan, what could be better?