Lullaby of Murdaland

Thanks to the mad skillz of Tribe, there's a lengthy interview with Michael Langnas, the editor-in-chief of Murdaland Magazine. He talks about current crime fiction, the response to the magazine's first issue (developing) and why it's going to be David to the "Goliath" of EQMM & AHMM:

No one has a chance.  I want to be clear.  I’m not putting down Ellery Queen or Alfred Hitchcock magazine’s readers. I’m not putting down their writers. I’m not putting down their editors. Everyone who’s so pissed off may want to read those last three sentences a few times. But, hey, we are going to be snide about a system where the only two drinks in the world are Coke and Pepsi and they’re owned by the same company. Imagine if Microsoft and Apple were both owned by the same company. We’d all be lucky to have floppy discs and dial-up modems. And that’s what’s happened with the mystery short story. It’s not healthy. The fact there’s no competition is the reason you can pick up either magazine and feel like you’ve been magically transported to a dentist’s waiting-room in 1971. They’re anachronistic and genteel and totally out of touch. That’s what absolute power does evidently. And it’s been a disaster for the crime short story.

Of course, Langnas says this at a time when I don't think there has been more crime short stories published (woe to those on the Edgar Award short story committee, who have a ton of reading still to do before the November 30 deadline) but there are a couple of things to tease out of here: Yes, competition is healthy, but EQMM & AHMM have their guidelines for a reason, and the trick is to get as dark or as light, as weighty or as frivolous as you wish while respecting the guidelines.

And so, Murdaland definitely fills a hole, and judging from the first issue, does so extremely well. But then, maybe it comes down to this: I've been in AHMM. I will be in EQMM sometime next year. And as long as I write a story that's both good and fits their guidelines, no reason why I can't get into Murdaland. Because it's not about being anachronistic or out of touch, it's about style. And the best writers know how to write in accordance to guidelines without sacrificing their own voice.

Comments

[Victor Gischler]

Sarah,

I think your comments are right on the money, but you mostly address things from an author's point of view. I'll come at it from a reader's point of view. I have plenty of respect for Ellery Queen and AHMM and the writers who are good enough to publish stories there. But as a reader, I just don't find myself eager to pick up these magazines. Just my gut reaction. However, I do find myself eager to grab an issue of Murdaland. The publication is offering something to readers not on the menu at EQ and AH. No matter how much you love your favorite steak house, sometimes you just need some sushi.

Victor Gischler

[Lana Lang]

Interestingly, Stephen King voiced a similar criticism of EQMM and AHMM in his recent interview in The Paris Review. He claimed that AHMM used to publish more literary stories until it got swallowed up by the same conglomerate that owns EQMM.

King is editing the Best American Short Stories Anthology, and he seems to imply that none of the stories in either magazine were worthy of inclusion. Since he is a big defender of genre work, that's a shame.

[patti abbott]

Where do you find these guidelines for AHMM? The only ones I find talk about margins, fonts and that a crime must be threatened or committeed. Is there something more specific than that?

[Steve Hockensmith]

There's no reason why stories written within AHMM and EQMM's guidelines can't be innovative and interesting. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I do believe there have been one or two perfectly fine short stories written without using the word "fuck."

Of course, there are certain kinds of stories that pretty much demand the dropping of a few f-bombs or a dead puppy or grandma turning tricks behind the nursing home to get her bingo money. These stories would probably not find a home at AHMM or EQMM because the audience would not enjoy them. Which is something people tend to forget in this conversation: As much if not more so than the editors, the *audience* created these guidelines.

AHMM and EQMM are read by tens of thousands of people every month. These readers can be very particular (no f-bombs, no dead puppies), and the editors know their tastes.

The challenge for the Murdaland crew is to prove that there's a substantial audience for their brand of short story. By substantial, I mean large enough and free enough with their cash to make a nationally distributed print magazine profitable on an ongoing basis. Victor Gischler is a great start, but Michael Langnas will need to find about 20,000 other, like-minded consumers if he wants his mag to really compete on the newsstands.

I don't agree with everything Langnas says, but at least he's putting his money where his mouth is, and for that I fucking give him props.

-Steve

P.S.: Sarah, I hope I haven't violated the writer's guidelines for your blog. Feel free to replace the word "fuck" with "frak." The dead puppy reference has to stay, though.

[Victor Gischler]

Steve Hockensmith wrote:

"Correct me if I'm wrong, but I do believe there have been one or two perfectly fine short stories written without using the word "fuck.""

Of course. And if I pick up a copy of Murdaland and the only difference is that they use the word fuck a lot, I'll be very disappointed. But I've had a sneak preview of one of the stories, and my feeling is it just flat out would not fit into AH or EQ. I'm not saying better or worse. I'm just saying a different fit.

And from the interview, I did not get the feeling Murdaland thinks they can go toe-to-toe with these big magazines. The BBQ joint a block from my house does not have as many locations as Burger King, but they have enough customers to stay in business.

Hey, I'm just glad there re more places publishing more short fiction. I'm encouraged by all the recent anthologies too.

Victor Gischler

[Steven]

Everyone's right. I got a copy of Murdaland at B'Con and what I've read so far is top notch stuff (and I haven't even turned to the ones I knew would be good like AN Smith and Ken Bruen). From the POV of someone who might subscribe, I'd like it if they dropped the us vs them pose. I like EQMM and AHMM as well, and it sounds like they're saying that Murdaland is only for people who DON'T like those outlets. They sometimes make it sound like it's an either/or thing and it doesn't have to be that way.

All that said, EQMM and AHMM demographics skew female and middle aged - too early to have a demographic for Murdaland, but I'm guessing their target audience is younger and male.

BTW, a recent AHMM story does have the F-bomb in it. Twice. The times, they are a-changing.

[Steven]

Patti,
I think the guidelines for EQMM and AHMM are probably something you need to pick by reading a couple of copies - certainly they include mild language, not very graphic violence or sex, and often the puzzle is the key to the story (though often not - I'm a horrible puzzler). I think EQMM is more intent on the puzzle solution than AHMM is, but that may just be me. Essentially they're looking for traditional mysteries.

That said Russel McLean has published several stories with AHMM that are richly atmospheric and felt very noiry to me.

[Steve Hockensmith]

Thanks for pointing out that AHMM has been f-bombed, Steven. Still no dead puppies, though. Which is a bummer, because it means my story "F**k All the Little Dead Poodles" will probably never grace the magazine's pages.

Hey, here's a new anthology idea: "Dead Puppy Noir." Takers, anyone?

I agree with everything Victor said, BTW: Not everyone's gonna like AHMM or EQMM-style stories, and it's a good thing there are more and more anthos, websites, magazines, etc. servicing those readers. As Steven points out, Murdaland is simply targeting a specific market niche, which is a fine thing to do. The anti-AHMM/EQMM stuff will probably play well with that audience. Other people it will drive away. So be it. That can happen when you stake out your turf.

In a way, this reminds me of the DC/Marvel Comics rivalry when I was a kid in the '70s. Stan Lee was always dissing stodgy old DC, and that scrappy, combative energy appealed to a lot of teenaged boys. But I, being a namby-pamby weirdo even then, was turned off by it -- it practically drove me into Superman's waiting arms. (Wait...better make that Wonder Woman. Superhero comics are homoerotic enough as it is.)

Anyway, I don't doubt that Murdaland will be publishing some great stories. But I'm also not sure a reader (or writer) like me would be welcome in the clubhouse. Which is fine!

May we all have our own clubhouses one day....

-Steve

[Ingrid (I.J.Parker)]

Actually I can absolutely get "pissed off" by having my stories called "anachronistic and genteel."
And for that matter, 11th century Japanese don't use the f-word or I would not have any qualms. Since when is that a criterion for a good story anyway?

[Bill Peschel]

FWIW, just picked up the "Best American Mystery Stories" anthology and leafed through the copyright page.

Total number of stories from EQ and AH: zero.

[Kevin Wignall]

Hmm, bear in mind I come at this as an Englishman, and therefore someone who didn't know EQ before I was published in it.

Murdaland sounds good but I disagree completely with Lagnas's (and to a lesser extent Victor's) portrayal of the stories accepted by the Dell magazines.

Yes, there are a lot of traditional stories, but of the three I've published, none have been puzzle-based and only one, "The Window", has been what you might call mainstream. "The Concept" involved macabre and strange things happening in the conceptual art world, and "Hal Checks Out" was about a psycopathic criminal helping people out of a hotel that's been taken over by terrorists.

In the case of the latter two I told my agent the stories were too left-field but the editors didn't hesitate and in all three cases, the response from EQ readers has been incredibly positive.

I can only speak from experience, and mine suggests that EQ is a broader church than people give it credit for. The presence of Steve H, Russell and now Sarah in the Dell magazines (as well as people like Jeff Deaver and Joyce Carol Oates) would seem to back that up.

[Victor Gischler]

Keviin Wignall said:

"Murdaland sounds good but I disagree completely with Lagnas's (and to a lesser extent Victor's) portrayal of the stories accepted by the Dell magazines."

Actually, I've only "portrayed" them by saying I don't see them as fitting in EQ or AH and that was based on the single story I happened to read before it was even submitted.

I see from the comments above the Steve has read some of the stories. Has anyone else read the debut issue? Do you think they'd fit into AH or EQ? If it's the same stuff then I'll happily subscribe to all 3 publications.

Victor

[Megan]

I've read the full first issue of MURDALAND and can't say enough good things about it. While I'm not familiar enough with EQ or AH to compare/contrast, I'd like to highlight that, while the MURDALAND stories are all dark, they also reflect a real range of styles and voices, influences, settings, etc. One of the few uniform aspects, I'd say, is an avoidance of kitsch. It's great, great new venue.

[David J. Montgomery]

I'm a little skeptical of anyone launching a new enterprise who spends more time talking about what's wrong with the other guy than they spend talking about what's right with themselves.

On the other hand, it did get them written up on here, and got us all commenting about it, so maybe they know what they're doing.

A new market for fiction is always welcome, so I hope they succeed.

[Michael Langnas]

I'd like to thank Sarah for linking to my interview with Tribe and for her two heroic, if ultimately doomed, attempts to spell my last name right. (Hey, I'll admit it -- it's a toughie!) Her kind words about Murdaland's debut were also appreciated.

As many of you know, my life -- well, it's not worth much these days.

Frankly, I'd prefer to spend my waning hours on earth exclusively with my beloved darling Tatianna and our little twins. I'm sure all of you can understand.

That said, I'd be remiss if I didn't make one quickie point in the brief interim before the heartless thugs from EQMM and AHMM "disappear" me, the way they have, oh, so many critics before.

Here goes. Sarah mentions how many anthologies there are today. Very true. I might argue that all too many rely on gimmicks ('Scarsdale Noir', 'Stichin': Mysteries about Needlepoint'), but that's for the reader to decide. One thing that must be noted though is how clique-y they are. And when it's not simply cliques, they tend to only publish established writers, frequently well known to their editors. Do these anthologies even take unsolicited submissions?

There are two magazine that are cheap, affordable, published frequently and available everywhere. They're what young mystery fans read. They're what's in the library. And, this is vital, they're where unknown writers submit. The fact that both magazines are owned by the same people is worthy of note and perhaps of comic derision as well. The fact that they're timid and anachronistic would seem to go without saying.

Well, then. I'd argue on, but I have a sobbing mail-order bride and two very confused little boys to console.

Go read the interview, people: it's all there! (You may be surprised to find I wasn't the one to first bring up this strangely heated topic.)

Remember, too, all of us here at Murdaland wish you folks nothing but the best! Please think of me well when I'm gone!

-- Michael Langnas, Murdaland magazine

[Xavier Lechard]

Lagnas claims he's not putting down AH/EQMM or its authors but ultimately that's what he does, in a very Penzler-like way. I do wonder once again why "advanced" writers cannot leave others alone rather than being smug and/or patronizing. If AH/EQMM is not your cup of tea, then don't read it, bar none.

[Kevin Wignall]

Victor, apologies, that was sloppy writing on my part. My inference from your steak house/sushi comment was that you considered EQ a little safe and, though I might be the exception to the rule, that hasn't been my experience.

Likewise, Michael, Murdaland does sound superb and I wish you the best with it, but the stories I've published in EQ haven't been timid or anachronistic and I do get the feeling the Dell magazines are moving with the times, albeit more slowly than some would like.

[Victor Gischler]

Kevin,

No apologies needed.

I don't pretend to be an expert on all the stories ever published in EQ or AH. I'm sure those magazines publish a good variety of short fiction. But I predict if we all reunited a year from now with a year's worth of EQ and AH stories and a year's worth of Murdaland stories, each stack would have a very differnt vibe. I think the genre needs the variety.

As for the editorial attitude ... hey, the Sex Pistols spit on "the establishment" all the time. It was their thing. I simply don't get offended by that stuff. I'm VERY proud to have published a short story in EQ ... I don't feel that accomplishment is diminished at all because of some theatrical posturing. Just me.

Also, after looking over my other posts, I see that I enjoy food analogies. No wonder I'm such a fatass.

Victor

[Laura]

I can't speak to Scarsdale Noir, but I know that Baltimore Noir has at least four short stories by writers who had never published fiction before: Lisa Respers France, Joe Wallace, Rob Hiaasen and David Simon. Yeah, I knew them all beforehand, but it wasn't cliquey to reach out to a) a former Sun reporter who knows the crime field as well as anyone; b) a New Yorker who, I suspect, had a story he was dying to write; c) a Sun reporter with a unique voice and d) the executive producer of The Wire. (Who, by the way, recycled his story in Season 4.) I did accept unsolicited manuscripts, but ultimately had to say no to them, as the contract capped the collection at sixteen and I felt the sixteen I solicited had "first dibs."

In a very Smalltimore moment, Cort happened to drop by my house during a party for Duane Sw. last December. (Duane, is it okay that I'm too lazy too double-check the spelling of your last name right now? It's late.) Cort is good friends with one of my neighbors. He was utterly delightful and very well-behaved. Cort left behind the Murdaland call to arms and, yeah, it called out AHMM and EQMM.

I've been around long enough to see this many times -- the arrival of someone/something talented and notable, who has to announce himself/herself/itself by trashing other folks/works. And, so far, most of them have gotten over it, and probably regret it.

Let me drop a name here with an anvil-like thud. When I interviewed Crumley for Crimespree a few weeks ago, I made some reference to the writers in our genre who didn't seem to care if they published subpar work. Crumley said: "I'm not going to say anything bad about any other writer."

It's not a bad way to go.

[Daniel Hatadi]

Negative marketing is a risky manuever, but sometimes I think it's appropriate. One company that is absolutely huge and has no trouble using this approach: Apple.

In terms of Murdaland, I think it's fun seeing everyone get stirred up. I've personally only read a few issues of EQMM & AHMM and they're not quite to my taste. Until Murdaland is more established, I see it as a harmless and fun marketing tactic.

I know I'm ordering it.

[Aldo]

Great writing is great writing regardless of the genre. And variety is the spice of life. So, can't we all get along.I eat steak and sushi together....my check is in the mail yesterday and I wish all the venue a good, hearty readership.

[Tribe]

Whew.

Some of this is way out of whack with reality. I dare anyone to find a single instance where someone else's work was "trashed" or an author was trashed.

Not only did it not happen, no one saw anything remotely like that happen, and no one can prove it happened.

Simply put, at no time did we "say anything bad about any other writer."

[tod goldberg]

In the last 10 years, I've published dozens of short stories ranging from crime, to literary, to surreal and I can tell you this: I've never sent a single one to either magazine. I know many people who've been published in both their pages -- including a guy who looks vaguely like me but is older and fatter -- and I've always happily bought the issues they were in. I guess my problem is this: Whenever I see the words "A Jeff Slade Mystery" before one of the stories, I want to hit myself in the face with a brick. Who the fuck is Jeff Slade? Or Chief Inspector Dix? Or whatever amalgamation of words appears before a short story that indicates to me that it will have all the emotional growth of Emmanuel Lewis. It's just a long way of saying that most of the stories feel irrelevent to me in both magazines, in a way I normally only feel when reading Reader's Digest while waiting for my prostate to be touched in a way none to stimulating. They don't take a lot of chances in either magazine, either with the authors they publish or the kinds of stories they choose, which is their purview, certainly. Of course, these new jacks might run into the same issue, publishing the same dark noir every month, or only Irish writers, or LA writers, or writers whose detectives aren't drunks but shoot a lot of heroin. With success comes complacency, which is what I see in EQ and AH, and which could certainly find it's way into Murdaland or ThugLit or any other crime journal. The fact is that crime short fiction can be just as predictable and silly and crime novels -- it's up the magazines to decide if they want to break new ground or if they are happy with cats solving crimes with the help of drunk cops searching for serial killer who only quotes Edgar Allen Poe...

[JDRhoades]

I don't think it's necessarily a put-down to say "they're one thing, we're different," unless you think Mike's saying something disparaging by comparing EQ and AHMM to Coke and Pepsi. I like Coke and Pepsi just fine, and enjoy them. But every now and then, I have a taste for something stronger. (And by every now and then, I mean around 5:30 every day.)
I don't think anyone can really deny that Murdaland fills a niche that EQ and AHMM just don't. I can't see EQ for example, publishing my story "Spadework." But I'm fine with that, and I don't consider it a putdown of EQ. If I was a TV writer, I wouldn't write the same crime show for CBS as I would for HBO. But so what?

[Laura]

Tribe,

As I said, I no longer have the letter that Cort was distributing, so I have to rely on my memory. But it was pretty aggressive in trashing AHMM and EQMM -- and, by implication, its writers and readers. In fact, after reading the letter, I decided not to submit. The letter left a really bad taste in my mouth, to continue with the food metaphors here. And I've never written for either magazine cited.

But I did edit one of the Akashic Noir books and contributed to two others. Was I wrong to infer some snideness about the series? Was "cliquey" a compliment? Was "Scarsdale Noir" meant to suggest the breadth of the series, or was it a way of suggesting something less laudatory?

I agree with Aldo -- I'd like for all of us to get along. I look forward to reading Murdaland. I want it to stick around. The more venues the better.