Can we get a set of links to the Psychosis tumblr, twitter accounts, etc. here?
I'll update them to the front page for easy access...sorry if I am stepping on your toes, Danny, but google sucks nuts.
Contents page as Danny last posted it
Part One: Deep Dementia
1.Another Lost Day by Bryan Howie
2. Grin on the Rocks By Rebecca Jones-Howe
3. In the Absence of Violence by Joshua D. Moyes
4. Jump by Dakota Taylor
5. Perfectly Natural by Jessica Taylor
6. Sine Qua Non by Kenneth Goldman --reprint
7. The Return by Liana V.
8. Puppet Show by Nicholas Wilczynski
9. Saturn’s Game By Jeremy Robert Johnson
10. Released by Richard Thomas --reprint
11. The Thing About Finn by Renee Asher
12. The Long Halls of Dead Days by Daniel W. Gonzales (final rewrite being done)
13. Job Security by Bradley Sands –
14. The Woman Ahead of Me by Monica Drake
15. Run Into His Arms by Sam Jackson
16. Everywhere and nowhere by robin van eck
17. Pest by Christi Zanelli
18. Grandmother by Sarah Davenport
19. Dear Baby Doll by Scott Carver
20. Trial by Fire by Nathan Pettigrew
Part Two: Heavily Medicated
21. Holes, Fillers and the Days Between by Jami Kali (still waiting)
22. A Table for One by J. Dulouz --done
23. Time and Place Martin Garrity--done
24. Doughboy in Control by Scott Barbour--done
25. Phantom Pains by Jason Van Horn--done
26. Shrill Cries Cut the Quiet by Rachel Cohen--done
27. The Frequent Flyer by Jamesey Lefebure--done
28. Wake by Robert Thomas--done
29. Numb by Winnie Ferree---waiting on rewrite
30. Sermons of my Childhood by Josef L.--done
31. This is what living like this does by R.Moon---waiting on rewrite
32. Neurotic Hooky by Christopher Jaramillo---rewrite
33. Charred by Sara Leslie--done
34. Silence by Tessa Yelton--done
Thanks!
I know there are a few twitter accounts roaming around out there, too, right?
So where do we stand on the subtitle debate of dividing the book up into two parts?
I like the section titles, and I think that a 400 page anthology would probably benefit from being split into sections.
@Danny:
It almost seems like you would have to with that many stories, but I don't know.
I'm reading Men Undressed and it is 380 pages--the same as Warmed and Bound; both have pretty high page counts but at the same time, perhaps because they contain shorts, they don't feel that long to me.
I have read some even longer ones in the past as well. Do you have any idea what the current word count might be? A rough estimate?
This might also hinge on the publisher's decision, right?
I don't like the idea of breaking it up into segments unless there is a REALLY strong thematic connection between the stories in each group. What's the point? I don't see how number of pages matters, as it's a short story collection then a reader can take a break at any time they like, they don't need the end of a section to allow them a feeling of a pause.
By adding sections, you are inviting the thought of - "why have these stories been grouped this way?" - and in our case is there actually a reason? If not then why bother?
I agree with Martin. At the moment they appear to be grouped somewhat arbitrarily, although I'm sure you just did that like a 'rough draft' concept. Or are they grouped thematically?
That could be interesting to divide them into parts, and I'd even suggest taking that one step further and perhaps going tri-partite.
Again, though, all of this is probably a moot point once a publisher begins taking a knife to this thing.
I agree with Wicked.
Then we need to decide new names or which stories go with which theme because of the length I feel the book needs to be broken into two segments. The book is 110,000 words so far
I don't think Jami Kali's story is going in, she never got back to me and then I facebooked her and she said she would send a draft and then didn't. I may have to cut another story too or it will go 460 pages
Well, Deep Dementia is fine, a nice snappy sub-title and I imagine that fits just about all of the stories. Heavily medicated - hmm are there enough drug related pieces for that one?
If you are set on segments, which is fair enough, then maybe there needs to be more than two, so you can be less general with the headings? That way there may well be enough medicated stories to fill a segment, as well as other potentially interesting groups.
I feel that if you are going to make the effort to subtitle, there might as well be as much theme involved as possible.
Would three roughly even groups work? Deep Dementia, Heavily Medicated, and .....?
Altered Reality?
Twisted Perspective?
Breaking Points?
Dangers Unto Themselves?
Cracked Mirrors?
I dunno, I'm tired, maybe those are all shit. Maybe somebody else has the perfect sub-title. I havent read every single story yet either so I wouldn't want to be the person to say for sure who's stories go in which section.
You should also probably have at least one of the stories we have by the bigger names in each section. Richard, Monica, Bradley, & Jeremy are the authors I'm thinking of. These are the guys who are likely to pull the most reviews, and will be our Featuring... names to splash on the cover if we go that route with the design. You want to pace those stories throughout the contents list.
So we may well be looking at 100k+ words once all the editing and niggling with the last few submission is finished? Wow. Still, 400 pages to 450 doesn't sound unreasonable for an anthology of so many authors.
Oh, and with trepidation I meekly ask,
did we decide on the title? Psychosis: Stories Of Madness? I know there was divided opinion and I don't want this thread to end up in the same posts all over again so Danny, did you lay down the law and decide? Probably it should be your call now we all had chance to have a say.
I agree with at least three sections, and with having the big-namers distributed evenly throughout the sections, with at least one of them relatively close to the beginning.
And I don't think "Heavily Medicated" relates to all the stories in that section.
Okay, three segments or more maybe more clinical catagories. Yeah, we decided on Psychosis: Stories of Madness which I like. It was our compromise.
Maybe...let's see....
how about this?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DSM-IV_Codes
These are the DSM-IV codes for different psychological disorder catagory types that psychiatrists use. We could really catagorize them how a real psychologist would.
So going by that list of disorders...how about everyone tells me which one they think they fit into?
Mood/Psychotic/Disassociative and Anxiety Disorders is where I see most of the stories falling into.
Mine: Generalized Anxiety Disorder.
Isn't there another story that may fit that category, though? Can't remember which.
I think the problem with categorizing them by disorder types is that a lot of stories may sort of sound similar/people may want to read one section over another/a good mix in terms of subjects is always the most refreshing...not that any of the stories are dull, at all--but two anxiety disorders next to each other may seem a bit repetitive; the reader may be tempted to skip around...
Argh, it's 4 a.m. and I may not be making sense. Goodnight.
mine...well.pedophilia+ general agressive psychosis
I too vote for different sections will make it flow nicely pace it for the reader.
I have no opinion on the sections.
sections? well, I vote for sections but not different volumes.
These are the DSM-IV codes for different psychological disorder catagory types that psychiatrists use. We could really catagorize them how a real psychologist would.
The trouble with using DSM categories Danny is that you are going to have the bulk of the stories fall into one or two categories and then have a few stories that might even be the only representative of their category. Whilst I can see how potentially there is almost a mirror there to the likely afflictions of any sample of people, and that could be a quirky angle, but I think that if you want to run segments for sure then they should be roughly the same length.
Also the DSM categories are too clinical, it's the mental illness vs madness thing again. These stories are a touch too fantastic at times for such a clinical approach (IMO of course). There's no reason why the two titles you have, plus one or two more similarly broad names, couldn't cover all of the stories. I think you were just a bit conservative trying to split them all under those two titles.
Lots of my views here are just coming from me being a pedant. I know that. Feel free to ignore me!
I hate being that one jury member that disagrees, but I like the idea of keeping the stories as one whole and letting them speak for themselves. It makes the reader do some of the work.
I don't disagree with that Rebecca. But I do understand Danny's reasons. It's a big word count.
I suppose. I haven't read many anthologies. The longer ones I've come across were moreso just "Canadian authors" with a wide array of stories. I find those anthologies a rather daunting read. At least ours has a central topic.
But, like Chester said, anything could happen. I should also say that I don't hate the idea of having sections, and that I think three is a good number. Maybe the last one could be for the "slightly mad", people who still function with society but are still off-kilter.
Sections could keep readers curious, and right, with a longer word count, it's a psychological thing that helps. It's not this long freakin' book I have to read. It's Parts 1, 2 and 3. Well I fiinished Part 1 and it was awesome, so why not give Part 2 a stab? "Oh you're reading Part 2? Just wait until you get to Part 3!"
Yeah I'm definitely for breaking up the anthology into sections, however I agree with Martin completely that if we're going that route, the stories within each section have to be connected in some way, even if it's a minor, subtle connection that the reader might not grasp at first. Making the reader do some of the work is a good point, but most readers, I imagine, will be unwilling to put in the work for a group of emerging unknowns. We can still challenge them as far as letting them figure out what the stories within each section have in common, if they even care at all about that sort of thing.
As far as a name or title goes, I like PSYCHOSIS: STORIES OF THE ILL. But that wasn't on the vote. I know that STORIES was, but I read how y'all thought that was missing something or needing more. We should stick to using this thread for the subject of sections, though. I agree on that, too. And in light of everything we've discussed so far, and despite differing opinions, we're all coming together quite nicely on this, I feel.
And in light of everything we've discussed so far, and despite differing opinions, we're all coming together quite nicely on this, I feel.
It really is a project. It's exciting!
If we give subtitles to the sections, I think it should be something metaphorical and not actually medical. You could just go "strange, stanger, strangest" and I'd be interested (although I would probably jump to 'strangest' right away).
You could also put them in alphebetical order by author's name or disorder's name or just put them in a bowl and draw names, but still break it into 33k-ish word sections. If we have sections, I vote for 3 of them. 2 is too few, 4 is too many.
I also vote for Betty Page for president, so my votes don't usually count. I do, on the otherhand, own a motorcycle. Soooooo....
She's never going to win if you don't spell her name correctly, Bryan.
I feel a poll coming on.
However, for clarity, what should be the catagory choices?
No sections
two sections: dementia, madness....
three sections: dementia, madness, bizarre...
Or maybe: Deep Dementia, Quiet Madness & Slightly Insane
Mild, Hot, Fire
Verde?
How about Stories Going in the Anthology and Those That are not, avery? which would you like to be? lol
:(
Okay, I'll be good...
As for splitting it, I see the point due to the length, but I think splitting it with technical terms/ideas could be a bad idea. One, we don't want to give too much to the reader, we want them to get what they get from the stories, and two, we really don't want to fiddle with trying to categorize these stories in technical terms when many cover different aspects, and sometimes even different disorders. For instance, my story is mainly about Finn and his APD, but you could look at it from a different perspective and wonder what is going on with Charles, KWIM? In other stories, people are medicated, but they have something else going on and/or the medication isn't the issue. Danny, your story is a good example--he is heavily medicated, but the story isn't about the medication as much as it is about what he mixes with the medication.
Deep Dementia, Quiet Madness & Slightly Insane
Again, with something like this, I see people skipping to the parts they think will be the most exciting. I wouldn't want someone to only read a third of the anthology because they think the "Slightly Insane" stories won't be as interesting as the "Deep Dementia" ones.
Now, going off your "Stories Going In the Anthology and Those That Are Not" joke, I think "Those That Are Not" could be a really cool section title. Like one section could be "One Of Us" or "Just Like Everyone Else" and "Those That Are not"---you can still play with pacing and stuff. Like...Bek's story could be a story that falls into "Just Like Everyone Else" and just chill you to the fucking bone, because you realize people like that DO have friends and put on a show, and Avery's story as well. "Those That Are Not" could be stories like yours or Demigod's where it's people that identify as being "different", and have things that keep them from society. Nick's would be another good one for "Those That Are Not".
And yes, my brain does weird things, and I got all of that from your joke.
That's interesting, Renee.
Like how when they interview neighbors of serial killers and they go, "he was such a nice guy".
It could be like:
This Could Be You (Bryan Howie's story would fit here, Bradley's, Robin's story, Martin's story) Just Like Everyone Else (Jessica's story, Rebecca's story, Josh's story, Renee's story) and Those Who Don't Belong (my story, nick's story, christi's story, etc.)
The Prologue could be a 5150 which is code for an Involuntary Psychiatric Hold and the Epilogue could be Institutionalized. The Bios are Treatment Options lol Okay, maybe now I'm going too far.
I agree with anything that keeps me in it. :P
^Was gonna say something else, but, yeah, that.
Jason's story gets it's own special section: Sexual Deviants
As well as that I like those possible section titles...with maybe a little rewording.
Looks like it's about to be Poll Time.
What if the bio page looked like a case file for someone in a mental institution?
Like in the top right you have the writer's picture with like a paperclip over it as if it's attached to a folder.
'History' would be the writer's bio essentially and then one section would be like 'Reported symptoms' and there would be a thing about what the psychosis is and/or how the story came to be, the inspiration for it, etc.
Wow, cool.
Hey I wouldn't be alone in that category at least.
That's interesting, Renee.
Like how when they interview neighbors of serial killers and they go, "he was such a nice guy".
It could be like:
This Could Be You (Bryan Howie's story would fit here, Bradley's, Robin's story, Martin's story) Just Like Everyone Else (Jessica's story, Rebecca's story, Josh's story, Renee's story) and Those Who Don't Belong (my story, nick's story, christi's story, etc.)
The Prologue could be a 5150 which is code for an Involuntary Psychiatric Hold and the Epilogue could be Institutionalized. The Bios are Treatment Options lol Okay, maybe now I'm going too far.
Actually, I fucking love this, except the bios part. And 5150 is my lucky number, haha.
What if the bio page looked like a case file for someone in a mental institution?
Like in the top right you have the writer's picture with like a paperclip over it as if it's attached to a folder.
'History' would be the writer's bio essentially and then one section would be like 'Reported symptoms' and there would be a thing about what the psychosis is and/or how the story came to be, the inspiration for it, etc.
I also adore this idea, but I don't have any idea how that effects things, like would it require a publisher to take on a bigger budget, or if we end up self publishing? I don't know much about this kind of thing. And the bios are supposed to be pretty short, so I don't know about the full page thing...hm...
Although I think Jessica's story would be better under "This Could Be You", considering that PPD is still very common and still very stigmatized.
While I think that the casefile idea was a good one, it's that type of thing that can drag the price of the book up. I was in the Thunderdome anthology, which was a beauty, but the photos and special layout must of made the book have to sell for a lot more than any other book to make profit.
Also, sent my story in a few days ago. Hope it's well recieved.
