March 29th, 2009 / 3:49 am
 Uncategorized

My First Look: The Legendary

background_02

At the risk of making some enemies and blacklisting myself, I’ve decided I’ll try to type honestly my reactions to reading new online literary journals that I’ve not before seen. Here is the first post in this unsteady series.

I’ll admit that I’m not too familiar with the online literary journal world. I tend to read only a handful of journals. I’m myopic in that way. But I’m also open to reading new ones, either at another’s suggestion or by my own discovery.

So I bring you online lit journal The Legendary, suggested to me by Brad Green. The journal’s url is ‘www.downdirtyword.com,’ so I’m expecting some raw shit, man. They’ve just posted their second issue, it seems.

The index page is clean, easy to navigate, and has a picture of a kangaroo boxing a man. The kangaroo appears to be winning, which is good news for the animal kingdom.

First thing I click on is submissions; I want to know how these editors present themselves. I learn that the editors are ‘always accepting submissions!’ A 100% acceptance rate? I decide to purposefully misunderstand this, and it feels great to do so. It’ll make up for all those Ninth Letter rejections choking my inbox. The Legendary editors go on:

We publish established writers as well as the new and nervous. We would love to be your very first publication if you rock our socks off.

Submissions should be short, sweet, to the point with a beginning, middle and end. Take us along for the ride. Make us feel it, see it, smell it, experience the jarring bumps in the road and bumps on the head, the streaming sunlight of morning and the glowing orange of evening. We want to get close enough to the characters to smell the perfume, the garlic, the gin and whiskey and beer sweating out of their pores. We want to hear their voices and see the expressions on their faces. Between all that, we demand to know not so much why they do the things they do; after all, we’re grown-ups. We demand to know what they did and how they did it. 

Blah blah blah, I can’t help but think; it’s not the kind of submissions guidelines/statement of vision I look for, to be honest. But that’s okay, right? I’m just one of many potential readers/submittors. Yes, the Barthelme reference is heartening (who doesn’t like losing their socks to good lit?), though its revision (‘rock’ instead of ‘knock’) makes me wonder if the editors are familiar with the phrase’s origins, just repeating a thing they’ve picked up secondhand, or trying to improve on something already perfect. Okay, I bet I’m wrong; they probably know the real deal, and I’m just a prick. Furthermore, I am glad the editors want to be able to smell the alcohol sweating out of my characters’ pores; in college, we’d wake up still drunk early Sunday mornings and go on our 12 mile runs, stinking of vodka and beer. These are good memories of mine, really. Our coach rarely demanded to know what happened Saturday nights, though I doubt he had cause to ask and instead made us suffer with an early wakeup call. Whatever. Based on their guidelines, Jim and Katie strike me as the kind who favor stories/fiction/essays that ‘show, dont’ tell,’ ‘cut to the chase,’ and ‘have lots at stake.’ Honestly, I’m a little skeptical at the moment, but only because I’m a grump when it comes to this sort of stuff.

First up, poetry. I click on Corey Mesler’s name. His name is familiar to me; he runs a bookstore called Burke’s Books in Memphis that I used to go to a lot during my college years. His five poems in this issue strike me as simple, cleanly lineated, and of low diction. My favorite is “The Dog’s Song,” in which Mesler writes, “I want to sing the way / our dog sings” and “I want to know her song / and why she waited / until she was old to begin it.” I liked this, I think. It was soft and pleasant to me, mostly because of the unique combination of noun and verb: a dog? singing? I’m not familiar with dogs (I’ve not owned one), so maybe this is odd to me, but I like thinking about a singing dog. I imagine a mournful sort of tune.

Then I click on JA Tyler of the wonderful ml press. I find another text from his “&” series. It begins:

A girl turned woman walks a path, the path, a road, a route. And she defines her walk in clouds and sky, the grey or blue, the movements.

I like the verb ‘defines’ here, as most of this poem seems to be about this woman’s having defined herself against an estranged man. Perhaps she matures because of this?

Okay, to fiction. Top of the page is “Wormed” by David Erlewine, a name I see at least a million fucking times on Duotrope’s Digest. Congratulations David Erlewine! over and over. Erlewine has been busy lately, that’s for sure. His story begins:

The two men greeted me in my garage. The first one, tall and thin, patted my shoulder and said “Hello, Pauly.” It was such a wholesome pat that I didn’t question being called Pauly. The second man, short and a bit plump, hugged me and said “It’s been too long.” He smelled like a cup of Earl Grey Tea with plum sauce.

Nice is the wholesome pat and the misnomer Pauly. My brain skipped at the mention of Earl Gray Tea, but only because I don’t like the presence of so many capital letters in such close proximity; it’s a personal problem, for which I should seek help. Sure, the scent of Earl Gray Tea is nothing compared to whiskey and coffee, but perhaps here it was enough to catch the editors’ attention. I’ll leave the rest of this little story for you to check out.

Then, figuring I ought to wrap up this little session, I clicked on the link to Jim’s blog, and discovered this picture:

gaylord

What does it mean?

I don’t know.

Maybe it doesn’t mean anything.

I’m okay with that, I think. 

 

 

If you know of an online journal that you think I might never have read and would like me to write about it, feel free to email us. I can’t promise a response or anything, but do know I’m interested in finding new things, and if time allows me, maybe I’ll devote a post to it?

Tags:

55 Comments

  1. March 29th, 2009 / 8:56 am Matt Cozart—

      That’s a Barthelme reference? I think the phrase “knock your socks off” goes back to the 19th century. The reason I think this is because I just read it on a site that I found by googling just now.

      http://www.word-detective.com/021804.html

      (Down near the end of the page.)

  2. March 29th, 2009 / 4:56 am Matt Cozart—

      That’s a Barthelme reference? I think the phrase “knock your socks off” goes back to the 19th century. The reason I think this is because I just read it on a site that I found by googling just now.

      http://www.word-detective.com/021804.html

      (Down near the end of the page.)

  3. March 29th, 2009 / 1:29 pm Justin Taylor—

      >>At the risk of making some enemies and blacklisting myself, I’ve decided I’ll try to type honestly my reactions to reading new online literary journals that I’ve not before seen.<<

      Anyone who would make you pay such a price for an honest reaction doesn’t deserve to be regarded as a potential venue for your work. Indeed, they need not even be regarded as a journal. It’s like when the ugly, smelly kid in the class who nobody likes suddenly comes up to you in the hall and shouts “you’re not coming to my birthday party!” The answer is always, “and?”

  4. March 29th, 2009 / 9:29 am Justin Taylor—

      >>At the risk of making some enemies and blacklisting myself, I’ve decided I’ll try to type honestly my reactions to reading new online literary journals that I’ve not before seen.<<

      Anyone who would make you pay such a price for an honest reaction doesn’t deserve to be regarded as a potential venue for your work. Indeed, they need not even be regarded as a journal. It’s like when the ugly, smelly kid in the class who nobody likes suddenly comes up to you in the hall and shouts “you’re not coming to my birthday party!” The answer is always, “and?”

  5. March 29th, 2009 / 1:43 pm jereme—

      rock your socks off is a tenacious d reference.

      [Dave Grohl (spoken):] 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6-6-6!

      [sung]
      It doesn’t matter if it is good,
      It only matters if it rocks.
      The main thing that we do is to rock your socks off.
      There’s no such thing as a rock prodigy,
      ‘Cause rock ‘n roll is bogus, right KG? (right!)
      Only thing that really matters is a classical sauce.
      And that’s why me and KG are classically trained
      To rock your fuckin’ socks off!
      Give ’em a taste KG.
      [KG (spoken):] Okay.

      That is Bach and it rocks
      It’s a rock block of Bach
      That he learned in the school
      Called the school of hard knocks!

      Give it up for KG, give it up for me,
      Give it up for KG, give it up for me,
      Give it up for rock,
      Give it up for blues,
      Give it up for everything that is not to lose.
      Now rock your socks off woman,
      We’ll rock your shit up y’all.
      Give it up children now to freak your shit out!
      All right!

      [spoken]
      Now I know what a lot of you are sayin’:
      “I just figured out what I’m ‘onna do with the rest of my days.
      I’m ‘onna get me an oversized guitar, gain forty pounds and be the next D.
      ” Well I got sour news for you, jack. It ain’t that easy.
      For instance, are you willing to make the commitment to wakin’ up
      at the crack a’ noon, for deep-knee rock squats!?
      Seven or eight at a time!? In a row?
      How ’bout are you willing to make the commitment
      to rock-hard tasty abs washer-board style?
      Glistening in the sun. How ’bout are you willin’ to make the commitment,
      wakin’ up, goin’ okay, it’s gig time, what t-shirt am I gonna wear?
      Can’t decide: Can’t decide: Brain aneurysm!
      We’ve been through so much bullshit just to be here tonight
      to rock your fuckin’ socks off. And all we ask in return is so precious little.
      All we’re askin’ you to do is drop trou and squeeze out
      a Cleveland Steamer on my chest.

      [sung]
      2-3-4,
      Give it up for KG, give it up for me,
      Give it up for KG, give it up for me,
      Give it up for rock, give it up for blues,
      Give it up for everything that is not to lose.
      Now rock your socks off woman,
      We’ll rock your shit up y’all.
      Give it up children won’t you freak your shit out!
      All right!
      [ad-lib hollers & screams]

  6. March 29th, 2009 / 9:43 am jereme—

      rock your socks off is a tenacious d reference.

      [Dave Grohl (spoken):] 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6-6-6!

      [sung]
      It doesn’t matter if it is good,
      It only matters if it rocks.
      The main thing that we do is to rock your socks off.
      There’s no such thing as a rock prodigy,
      ‘Cause rock ‘n roll is bogus, right KG? (right!)
      Only thing that really matters is a classical sauce.
      And that’s why me and KG are classically trained
      To rock your fuckin’ socks off!
      Give ’em a taste KG.
      [KG (spoken):] Okay.

      That is Bach and it rocks
      It’s a rock block of Bach
      That he learned in the school
      Called the school of hard knocks!

      Give it up for KG, give it up for me,
      Give it up for KG, give it up for me,
      Give it up for rock,
      Give it up for blues,
      Give it up for everything that is not to lose.
      Now rock your socks off woman,
      We’ll rock your shit up y’all.
      Give it up children now to freak your shit out!
      All right!

      [spoken]
      Now I know what a lot of you are sayin’:
      “I just figured out what I’m ‘onna do with the rest of my days.
      I’m ‘onna get me an oversized guitar, gain forty pounds and be the next D.
      ” Well I got sour news for you, jack. It ain’t that easy.
      For instance, are you willing to make the commitment to wakin’ up
      at the crack a’ noon, for deep-knee rock squats!?
      Seven or eight at a time!? In a row?
      How ’bout are you willing to make the commitment
      to rock-hard tasty abs washer-board style?
      Glistening in the sun. How ’bout are you willin’ to make the commitment,
      wakin’ up, goin’ okay, it’s gig time, what t-shirt am I gonna wear?
      Can’t decide: Can’t decide: Brain aneurysm!
      We’ve been through so much bullshit just to be here tonight
      to rock your fuckin’ socks off. And all we ask in return is so precious little.
      All we’re askin’ you to do is drop trou and squeeze out
      a Cleveland Steamer on my chest.

      [sung]
      2-3-4,
      Give it up for KG, give it up for me,
      Give it up for KG, give it up for me,
      Give it up for rock, give it up for blues,
      Give it up for everything that is not to lose.
      Now rock your socks off woman,
      We’ll rock your shit up y’all.
      Give it up children won’t you freak your shit out!
      All right!
      [ad-lib hollers & screams]

  7. March 29th, 2009 / 4:43 pm Ryan Call—

      ugh
      ive tried to respond to these comments like four times and im doing somethign wrong

      ive been trying to say that i had never ehard that phrase knock your socks off before utnil four years ago when i went through a huge barthelme phase. i think i read it in ‘not knowing’ though i could be wrong. i might have read it in another essay though. so i always associate the phrase with him.

      anyhow, thanks for showing me this, matt and jereme. it has rebooted my mind a littl

  8. March 29th, 2009 / 12:43 pm Ryan Call—

      ugh
      ive tried to respond to these comments like four times and im doing somethign wrong

      ive been trying to say that i had never ehard that phrase knock your socks off before utnil four years ago when i went through a huge barthelme phase. i think i read it in ‘not knowing’ though i could be wrong. i might have read it in another essay though. so i always associate the phrase with him.

      anyhow, thanks for showing me this, matt and jereme. it has rebooted my mind a littl

  9. March 29th, 2009 / 6:09 pm Katie Moore—

      Thank you for taking the time to give The Legendary such an entertaining review. We aren’t the kind of editors who blacklist, and we surely don’t seek to make enemies with such thoughtful critics.

      I now realize that the heading on the Submissions page is wildly unclear and some refining of the guidelines is in order.

      If you feel like poking around further in this issue, may I suggest the stellar poem “Cutter,” by Rusty Barnes, and “Blues for Mizmoon,” by our own Jim Parks. I do hope you’ll visit our April 9th Issue and find it much improved.

      Oh, as for ‘rock your socks off,’ that’s just…what I say. But am I familiar with Barthelme? Sheesh. Any gal passionate about flash fiction should be flogged if she is not. I’ll even volunteer to do the flogging, unless you want to share the pleasure?

      Thanks again,
      Katie Moore
      The Legendary Chick

  10. March 29th, 2009 / 2:09 pm Katie Moore—

      Thank you for taking the time to give The Legendary such an entertaining review. We aren’t the kind of editors who blacklist, and we surely don’t seek to make enemies with such thoughtful critics.

      I now realize that the heading on the Submissions page is wildly unclear and some refining of the guidelines is in order.

      If you feel like poking around further in this issue, may I suggest the stellar poem “Cutter,” by Rusty Barnes, and “Blues for Mizmoon,” by our own Jim Parks. I do hope you’ll visit our April 9th Issue and find it much improved.

      Oh, as for ‘rock your socks off,’ that’s just…what I say. But am I familiar with Barthelme? Sheesh. Any gal passionate about flash fiction should be flogged if she is not. I’ll even volunteer to do the flogging, unless you want to share the pleasure?

      Thanks again,
      Katie Moore
      The Legendary Chick

  11. March 29th, 2009 / 6:15 pm Ryan Call—

      hi katie,

      i was mostly teasing you guys about the heading on the subs page and rock socks off. good luck with the journal.

      thanks for stopping by

      ryan

  12. March 29th, 2009 / 2:15 pm Ryan Call—

      hi katie,

      i was mostly teasing you guys about the heading on the subs page and rock socks off. good luck with the journal.

      thanks for stopping by

      ryan

  13. March 29th, 2009 / 8:40 pm Brad Green—

      Read the Matt S. Debenedictis piece “Sleight of Hand” for a killer last line.

  14. March 29th, 2009 / 4:40 pm Brad Green—

      Read the Matt S. Debenedictis piece “Sleight of Hand” for a killer last line.

  15. March 29th, 2009 / 10:19 pm Nathan (Nate) Tyree—

      Hey katie.

  16. March 29th, 2009 / 6:19 pm Nathan (Nate) Tyree—

      Hey katie.

  17. March 30th, 2009 / 1:29 am Jim Parks—

      Thanks for the review. It’s a very good development for us.

      Jim

  18. March 29th, 2009 / 9:29 pm Jim Parks—

      Thanks for the review. It’s a very good development for us.

      Jim

  19. March 30th, 2009 / 10:49 am David Erlewine—

      Am I the only one who has figured out that Duotrope doesn’t fact check?

  20. March 30th, 2009 / 6:49 am David Erlewine—

      Am I the only one who has figured out that Duotrope doesn’t fact check?

  21. March 30th, 2009 / 1:12 pm Brad Green—

      Fact check what?

  22. March 30th, 2009 / 9:12 am Brad Green—

      Fact check what?

  23. March 30th, 2009 / 2:53 pm PHM—

      Nobody mentioned that a) the art is cool but b) they need to build a website…

  24. March 30th, 2009 / 10:53 am PHM—

      Nobody mentioned that a) the art is cool but b) they need to build a website…

  25. March 30th, 2009 / 3:02 pm jereme—

      matt is the whore’s moan.

      i have much love for him.

  26. March 30th, 2009 / 11:02 am jereme—

      matt is the whore’s moan.

      i have much love for him.

  27. March 30th, 2009 / 3:03 pm jereme—

      who the fuck fact checks ?!?

      i mean in general.

  28. March 30th, 2009 / 11:03 am jereme—

      who the fuck fact checks ?!?

      i mean in general.

  29. March 30th, 2009 / 4:00 pm Ryan Call—

      haha

      you mean to say you just make up acceptances?

      i think that would be really funny,a ctually.

  30. March 30th, 2009 / 12:00 pm Ryan Call—

      haha

      you mean to say you just make up acceptances?

      i think that would be really funny,a ctually.

  31. March 30th, 2009 / 4:10 pm Clapper—

      Am I the only one bugged by the fact that both editors have pieces published in both their first two issues?

  32. March 30th, 2009 / 12:10 pm Clapper—

      Am I the only one bugged by the fact that both editors have pieces published in both their first two issues?

  33. March 30th, 2009 / 5:12 pm Katie Moore—

      Oh, does that bother you? It was intended as an offering to our readers, writers, and most especially people interested in understanding what we’re all about.

      I am always personally delighted when editors include their own work, as long as it doesn’t overwhelm the rest of the content, which should, of course, be the focus of the publication.

      I’m sure we will appear here and there, in some issues and not in others. It is not done in the spirit of vanity, but rather with the intention of allowing you (readers, writers, and critics) to know who we are and what we do. We seek an intimate experience with those who walk through our doors, welcome personal e-mails, and will never send a form reply to a submission.

      We will never place our own work in an issue that would be better rounded out with the inclusion of another piece. Our publishing schedule of 26 issues a year ensures that once your work is accepted with us, we will include it in an issue that is crafted to flow together and run the gamut of emotion. Sometimes it is better to include my own work, modestly, than to publish a piece in the wrong issue and throw off the vibe…

      But it’s good to know it bugs you. I’ll be mulling it over…I’d rather that we appear to be anything other than a vanity project.

      KM
      The Legendary Chick

  34. March 30th, 2009 / 1:12 pm Katie Moore—

      Oh, does that bother you? It was intended as an offering to our readers, writers, and most especially people interested in understanding what we’re all about.

      I am always personally delighted when editors include their own work, as long as it doesn’t overwhelm the rest of the content, which should, of course, be the focus of the publication.

      I’m sure we will appear here and there, in some issues and not in others. It is not done in the spirit of vanity, but rather with the intention of allowing you (readers, writers, and critics) to know who we are and what we do. We seek an intimate experience with those who walk through our doors, welcome personal e-mails, and will never send a form reply to a submission.

      We will never place our own work in an issue that would be better rounded out with the inclusion of another piece. Our publishing schedule of 26 issues a year ensures that once your work is accepted with us, we will include it in an issue that is crafted to flow together and run the gamut of emotion. Sometimes it is better to include my own work, modestly, than to publish a piece in the wrong issue and throw off the vibe…

      But it’s good to know it bugs you. I’ll be mulling it over…I’d rather that we appear to be anything other than a vanity project.

      KM
      The Legendary Chick

  35. March 30th, 2009 / 5:32 pm Ryan Call—

      hey dave,

      i dont think im bugged really. if the peices and so on are building towards something, some spirit, maybe, that the eds want to show to the world, then its resaosnable to me, i think, especially for a newer journal to try to do that.

      i dunno?

  36. March 30th, 2009 / 1:32 pm Ryan Call—

      hey dave,

      i dont think im bugged really. if the peices and so on are building towards something, some spirit, maybe, that the eds want to show to the world, then its resaosnable to me, i think, especially for a newer journal to try to do that.

      i dunno?

  37. March 30th, 2009 / 5:38 pm dave erlewine—

      re fact checking, you got it, ryan. i’m going to claim zyzzyva and send the duotrope operators a note i’m in dc.

  38. March 30th, 2009 / 1:38 pm dave erlewine—

      re fact checking, you got it, ryan. i’m going to claim zyzzyva and send the duotrope operators a note i’m in dc.

  39. March 30th, 2009 / 5:39 pm Ryan Call—

      you should just
      really just claim acceptances to like 2,000 journals today

      what happens then?

  40. March 30th, 2009 / 1:39 pm Ryan Call—

      you should just
      really just claim acceptances to like 2,000 journals today

      what happens then?

  41. March 30th, 2009 / 2:01 pm Nathan Tyree—

      I agree here. It doesn’t bother me at al.

  42. March 30th, 2009 / 6:01 pm Nathan Tyree—

      I agree here. It doesn’t bother me at al.

  43. March 30th, 2009 / 6:01 pm Nathan Tyree—

      that would be hillarious

  44. March 30th, 2009 / 2:01 pm Nathan Tyree—

      that would be hillarious

  45. March 30th, 2009 / 7:42 pm Clapper—

      Yeah, I dunno. Maybe the lines are blurring so much between bloggy-type lit mags and more traditional lit mags where this is becoming totally kosher. And I should have delved deeper–I didn’t realize your publication schedule was every two weeks. Dayum. That’s a lot, and more power to ya.

      I wonder, in light of your comments about flow/communications/etc. if it might actually make sense to present it in a more bloggy manner, allowing for comments, etc. Seems like it’d be a good fit for that intimate experience… (I still remember, for example, one of the more interesting parts of NFG being its message boards).

      Regardless, it’s a cool start. I wish you all the best with it.

  46. March 30th, 2009 / 3:42 pm Clapper—

      Yeah, I dunno. Maybe the lines are blurring so much between bloggy-type lit mags and more traditional lit mags where this is becoming totally kosher. And I should have delved deeper–I didn’t realize your publication schedule was every two weeks. Dayum. That’s a lot, and more power to ya.

      I wonder, in light of your comments about flow/communications/etc. if it might actually make sense to present it in a more bloggy manner, allowing for comments, etc. Seems like it’d be a good fit for that intimate experience… (I still remember, for example, one of the more interesting parts of NFG being its message boards).

      Regardless, it’s a cool start. I wish you all the best with it.

  47. March 30th, 2009 / 8:05 pm Katie Moore—

      Thanks for your well wishing!

      We did begin as a blog, but for various reasons abandoned the format. We have an entire coffee ringed napkin full of functionality to add to the site, including the ability to leave comments. We also plan to have a chat night each issue, inviting authors and readers to come together for some virtual face time.

      We plan a lot.

      K

  48. March 30th, 2009 / 4:05 pm Katie Moore—

      Thanks for your well wishing!

      We did begin as a blog, but for various reasons abandoned the format. We have an entire coffee ringed napkin full of functionality to add to the site, including the ability to leave comments. We also plan to have a chat night each issue, inviting authors and readers to come together for some virtual face time.

      We plan a lot.

      K

  49. March 30th, 2009 / 9:11 pm PHM—

      actually they won’t let you report an unreasonable number of acceptances without rejections if i remember right i don’t know what i was doing i think i was only listing the places that i was accepted to there

  50. March 30th, 2009 / 5:11 pm PHM—

      actually they won’t let you report an unreasonable number of acceptances without rejections if i remember right i don’t know what i was doing i think i was only listing the places that i was accepted to there

  51. March 30th, 2009 / 9:15 pm Clapper—

      Very cool. Would be especially cool to figure out a way to tap that chat into web cams/mics. That solves the problem of readings for international pubs.

  52. March 30th, 2009 / 5:15 pm Clapper—

      Very cool. Would be especially cool to figure out a way to tap that chat into web cams/mics. That solves the problem of readings for international pubs.

  53. March 30th, 2009 / 7:27 pm How I Write « Nathan Tyree’s Weblog—

      […] The Legendary, a zine I like (and that had the good taste to publish me a while back) has been reviewed at HTML Giant: right fucking here. […]

  54. April 10th, 2009 / 1:48 am thom young—

      I got a story there issue 3, I’ve never read the Paris Review or want to.

  55. April 9th, 2009 / 9:48 pm thom young—

      I got a story there issue 3, I’ve never read the Paris Review or want to.