Tell us a bit about Dark Echo. When and how did it get started?
The Web site was an outgrowth of an e-mail newsletter and horror writers workshop that started in 1994. Original content I had written for OMNI, Universal Studios HorrorOnline, the newsletter (which was weekly for about six years) was added over the years. I still add both original and re-published material. Unfortunately, I do not have much time for it these days. I have plans, when time allows, for a new direction.
Is the site aimed at readers of horror, or authors as well?
Both, but mostly for readers -- however, writers should certainly be readers, too!
How may authors interested in a review by Dark Echo submit their books?
I don't like to post my address publicly, so it is best if they email me (darkecho@darkecho.com) for that. I do remind folks that although I'll accept any book for review, I do not promise a review and if it is reviewed the review may not be positive. I'd also like to point out that I review professionally for three print magazines (currently) as well as actively recommend books for awards and to others in the field. Just because you don't see a review with my name on it somewhere does not mean I haven't reviewed it or, quite possibly, been helpful in other ways.
Do you consider freelance articles and reviews? What about short stories?
I do have some material written by others on site, but am not looking for more right now.
Do you think the horror fiction market has declined, reached a plateau, or is still climbing?
First, let's do the history: There was a big market for horror in the eighties, but the demand was a result of publishing wanting a certain "type" of formula horror. That wasn't a great thing for horror in general, but at least a few good things come of it. One was that writers got published, some of whom were "learning in public". Another was that, along with the formula novels, some good stuff got published, too.
A lot of writers had hopes that this would go on forever, but it did not. Then there were hopes that these "happy days" would come back.
That sort of "boom" is not coming back. For one thing, publishing has changed so drastically in the last 15 years, it would be impossible. For a while in the 90s, there was next to no market for horror of any sort. That dearth has been corrected, but that does not mean that much generic horror is being published. Some of the paperback horror slots are now filled with media tie-ins; some with continuously in print "blockbuster" horror. Unlike the 1980s, separate publication of YA titles fulfills some horror "needs." More "literary" horror is published as "fiction" rather than horror. There is a lot of genre crossover that combines sf and fantasy and horror and mystery, etc.
But formula horror does not sell well enough for major publishers to publish much of it -- so if you are trying to sell a novel written *like* Stephen King or *like* anyone else has written, good luck. Your chances are slim.
Write a dark novel that is original or a new innovation on an old theme, then your chances improve, but that does not mean your book will be marketed as "horror."
There is a horrific or supernatural element in many adult fiction books these days. To someone with a broad definition of horror like me, then, yes, there's a respectable market for horror, even if it is not called horror.
Vampire novels have become a market unto themselves. No publisher acknowledges wanting to buy more of them, but they must be buying them because there are many still being published.
An area that crosses into vampirica is paranormal romance. It took the big publishers a little too long to figure out there was a market for these. Now they have and I'm not sure how many writers the market will take. But these readers are, to generalize, more like romance readers than horror readers. Romance readers are very loyal and will, once they find an author they like, stick with her book after book. That's why romance continues to make up over 50 per cent of the mass-market paperback market. So it is hard to gauge the upper limits.
And, although there are many good horror short stories written and published each year, there are not many horror-specific markets -- especially competently edited ones.
Let me point out one other thing: There are over 100 "small presses" now publishing horror books. These range from self-publishers fronting their own projects to long-established limited edition publishers to profitable small businesses issuing a couple of dozen titles a year. I'm one of them myself with Infrapress (www.infrapress.com). But unless you are an established professional writer with non-commercial projects (books the major publishers do not feel will sell profitably for them) or a backlist you'd like to see re-issued or literally "discovered" by one of the critically notable publishers, most of these publishers are not really a market for newer writers.
New wave fabulist fiction seems to be a growing niche among small horror presses. How would you compare this type of writing with regular horror?
The better small publishers publish primarily that which they love. Their personal tastes often run to "dark" -- but that doesn't mean they like badly written and unimaginative books and stories just because they are dark. When you don't find material you like, you don't publish it. When they say they aren't publishing horror, that doesn't mean they aren't publishing material that can be defined as horror. It does mean that they leave lower quality and regurgitations of the same-old-thing to others.
There are literary distinctions that can be made and labeled, but that' more of an academic exercise than one pertinent to writing. There's also a part of these labels that express, an urge to enunciate the mix of science fiction, fantasy, "literary writing", horror, and what-have-you that is being written today.
But there's also a desire to avoid being called "horror." A few years back, the catch phrase was "magic realism." There was a bit of a stab at "new weird" even more recently. But I can't say that it is pertinent to sort them out. I'm not even sure you need to. You might call it all "fantasy" if you want a single label.
I don't blame people for not wanting their work labeled as "horror." "Horror" means one thing to me, but you have to realize that MOST people have an entirely the different idea of what "horror" means and that idea is shaped primarily by what is the "teen horror genre" of bloody icky mayhem. In the last ten years, that definition has adhered even more firmly. The battle has, I think, already been lost. At the same time, "horror", although not a great term, is one we are stuck with. No viable alternative has appeared. The best you can do is try to point out the broadest meaning of the word to others and hope to continue convincing the masses one person at a time.
Within the horror genre there are several variations--atmospheric, psychological, hardcore, to name a few. Which one do you think is more popular at the moment?
None. All. In the BIG literary picture, in the last five years there have been some huge successes at the very top level of best-sellerdom: Laurell Hamilton, Alice Sebold, now Elizabeth Kostova. None of their books are called horror. Hamilton crated a new type of erotic vampire novel, a female adventure series; Sebold combined the psychological thriller with a supernatural revenge angle; Kostova wrote "historical horror."
There is also the immense popularity of Christian horror and the old standards like King, Koontz, and Harris. Even if Anne Rice, Dean Koontz, and Stephen King never write another "horror" novel, their backlists sell more strongly than most new releases. The Harry Potter books are very dark and getting darker.
That's the real world of popularity where hundreds of thousands of books are sold. That is the world that really matters in publishing. Technically *none* of those books are categorized as horror. The vast majority of people who buy them are not buying "horror," they are buying brand names or "hot new" writers.
What are your predictions for the future?
Not really a prediction, but I do feel that science fiction, fantasy, and horror are, more and more, one fictional pot that is being stirred. Thrillers, mysteries, and romance are thrown in sometimes, too, even history.
When you look at the history of horror fiction, which type of supernatural "creatures" have had the most success and notoriety under the public eye, witches, ghosts, zombies, monsters, or vampires?
Vampires have become a genre unto themselves in the last 30 years. Zombies, as now known, are pretty much a cinematic creation and still linger in film more than literature. Human monsters are probably more terrifying these days than supernatural ones. Witches, per se, have never really been a strong horror motif although supernatural magic is strong in fantasy in general right now. Ghosts have a rich literary history and will always be in fiction.
What is the scariest book you've ever read?
They daily newspaper is scarier than any work of fiction.
Which authors, in your opinion, will be remembered as the best horror writers of the 20th Century?
I don't think you can really quantify that way. The "best" literature is not always what is remembered. Film was the predominant art form to deliver horror to the masses in the 20th century and it is what probably what will remain in the public mind. As far as literature, certainly King and Lovecraft will be seen as influential.
Tell us about your workshops and how authors may take part in them.
I have not been involved in free workshops for many years now. I do teach classes and a workshop for Writers.com and also tutor and critique. Information is at www.writers.com
