Fellowship & Fairydust

Storm Humbert was born in Fayette, Ohio—which his website observes is “literally a one stoplight town.” Since then, he has earned an MFA from Temple University, taught (writing, rhetoric, and composition) at Temple and Sienna Heights University, and published speculative fiction in magazines like Galaxy’s Edge, Interzone, and Apex Magazine.

Some of his greatest success has come through the Writers of the Future Contest. He received a Silver Honorable Mention in the 2016 contest and was a finalist in the 2018 content. Then, he won third place in the 2019 contest. His award-winning story, “Stolen Sky,” appeared in Writers of the Future Volume 36.

Due to COVID restrictions, the 2019 contest’s convention and award show were postponed a year. As a result, Humbert didn’t attend the Writers of the Future Awards in Hollywood until 2021, where he met not just the winners from his year but also the subsequent year. As Humbert put it, “while some of us had twice the wait, it meant all of us got to meet twice as many winners, formed twice as many friendships, and connected ourselves with twice as many of our peers at similar points in our careers.”

The twice-as-large community became the basis for Calendar of Fools, a small press that Humbert helped start. Calendar of Fools will release its first book in 2023, Inner Workings, which will be an anthology containing works by other Writers of the Future winners (including previous Fellowship & Fairydust interviewee Luke Wildman).

Humbert was kind enough to answer a few questions.

Interview Questions

To start off, Storm, congratulations on your award. How did you feel receiving that win after you’d had several stories get close to winning in past contests?

Thank you. I still remember where I was when I got the call from Joni Labaqui. There was this massive rush of validation as soon as she told me I was a winner. I think validation is a major gift that this contest (and most publishing markets, really) give. I think it’s incredibly valuable in this business. We face so much rejection that it means a lot when we experience those moments of “good enough.”

Did the plan for Calendar of Fools emerge slowly, or was there a clear moment where someone said, “Hey, we should start something together”?

I’d say the idea that Calendar of Fools would be a legal entity that exists as a formal business emerged more slowly. Still, we’d all more or less decided we wanted to publish something together very soon after our workshop and gala week.

How did the press decide on Calendar of Fools as a name?

A: We had multiple meetings about it, actually. Well, we didn’t have meetings exclusively about the name, but it came up multiple times. The name was ultimately inspired by the message they drilled into us at the Writers of the Future workshop: namely that we are the future of our respective genres. The press’s name is derived from an Og Mandino quote that goes, “Tomorrow is only found in the calendar of fools.” The quote is obviously meant to be a warning against procrastination, but we kind of riffed on it to say, “We are tomorrow, and here’s where you can find us.”

You’ve described Calendar of Fools as a way to pay forward the gifts that Writers of the Future provided. In your opinion, why is it important to pay forward the gifts we get from creative communities?

I think it’s important because anyone who makes it in this industry did it with help. We owe help to others because it was given to us. More than that, though, for many artists (or creatives in general), we aren’t solely here by choice. This is a need, for many of us. We can’t not do this, so the least we can do is lessen each other’s burdens and help each other along.

Is Calendar of Fools open to taking submissions?

Our next project has an open-call element, but we don’t do rolling submissions. We will put out calls when we are looking.

Creating a community for writers clearly matters to you. Does that connect with your teaching experience?

Somewhat, maybe. I think it’s grown naturally from my experience as a student and practitioner of this craft, though.

When I studied under Samuel R. “Chip” Delany at Temple, he was always so gracious, and patient, and kind. I was intimidated the first time I ever came to his office because he was Samuel R. Delany: a living legend, sci-fi grandmaster, and one of my heroes, but he put me at ease so quickly. And it’s been that way with everyone I’ve met in this industry who has been where I want to be. I think I’m so set on building community because the community is one of the things that makes the spec-fic genre unique for both readers and writers. Community isn’t some permanent infrastructure beyond time and dilapidation. It isn’t something you make and then enjoy forever. It must be constantly built and rebuilt. You can never stop building community if you want it to endure.

Thank you for mentioning Delaney; I was wondering about your experience taking his classes at Temple University. Can you share any stories?

I have so many, but my favorite is probably how he changed my concept of story structure with what seemed to be an off-the-cuff remark about what the different kinds of stories do. He said, “A flash fiction evokes an emotion, a short story tells a story, and a novel makes an argument.”

Viewing my various projects through those lenses has helped me tremendously, and the last bit (about the argument) is actually one of the cornerstones of the class I teach on magic systems as metaphors.

Your “About the Author” profile in Writers of the Future Volume 36 mentioned that you’ve grown a lot through being a slush reader for Clarkesworld—an interesting mention since so many writers think of the slush pile in totally negative terms. What are some things you’ve learned from reading the slush pile?

Sorry in advance, but this is going to be a longer answer.

Basically, growing as a writer requires reading not because it shapes your style or voice or “gives you the answers.” Writing requires reading because it helps you build a library full of techniques for solving specific problems on the page. Chip taught me that writing is largely about solving problems on the page.

The reason slush reading is so valuable is because you are exposed to a wealth of examples of other writers addressing problems on the page both successfully and unsuccessfully. The reason this is different than just reading published stuff is because you’re more likely to see mostly successful techniques for solving problems in published work, whereas slush piles are heaped full of failed attempts.

Slush reading shows you approaches that are failing to solve problems, and you get to benefit from this because you can look at the story from this removed vantage and ask yourself, “Why did this approach fail?” This is a powerful complement to the question asked of successful stories, “Why did this work?” This combination allows you to get maybe some insight into why some techniques are more successful than others—to peek closer at the actual source of this “problem on the page.” I think this knowledge is essential when we’re deciding which tactics are optimal for our own specific stories and their specific goals.

In short, it’s hard to say that slush reading taught me any specific things. It’s more accurate to say that it allowed me to learn my lessons more deeply.

More details about Inner Workings can be found on its Kickstarter page. More details about Humbert’s writing can be found on the Writers of the Future podcast episode, where he was a guest alongside Luke Wildman and Zack Be, or on his website.