Random
We Are All Friends Here
I’ve been thinking about nepotism and croneyism and friends publishing friends because I often hear people talking, complaining, and bitching about the insular nature of (independent) publishing.
Intrapublishing (new word!) happens but not as much as you’d think. Some magazines are largely vanity presses but most are not.
We all know each other, right? We read each other and we publish each other and support each other and love each other and hate each other. It’s a small small community. The longer you stick around, the more inevitable it becomes that you will encounter people you know and/or like (or dislike as the case may be) in your submission queue. Does that influence editorial decisions? Sometimes. If I know you, for example, and you send me a 7,500 word story I will read it but that isn’t a guarantee of publication. Most editors are great people with integrity who can look beyond friendship and/or mutual respect. I get rejected from acquaintances and friends all the time.
But we don’t know each other. I’m old-fashioned. I still generally believe that my friends are people who have seen me doing something awkward at a bar. So we’re friends, but we’re not friends. I may know who you are and we may exchange e-mails and comments on various blogs but I don’t feel any particular obligation to publish your work when it comes my way unless it is outstanding.
The Internet and the interconnectedness of magazines and blogs and writers and editors implies an intimacy that doesn’t really exist. People often assume croneyism is taking place when in fact, speaking from my own experience both as a writer and editor, it isn’t.
Beyond that, so what if editors publish their friends. I happen to know some really good writers. Is it really a problem?
Tags: editors, Friends, literary communities, Publishing
Great post. And nope.
Great post. And nope.
No.
Except there are some people who really wanna play kickball. They might be good or they might suck, but they really love playing kickball. And there’re those kids who’ve been on the field for longer, or who play so much everday the other kids know who they are, and they know their skills. And even if the new kids get to play, sometimes the other kids’ll compare them to the kids who are good and play everyday. And they might not be as good, but maybe one of these newer kids kicks the ball different…. one of these new kids uses the tip of his foot instead of soccer style.
But I believe you may be in the minority, in terms or not letting emotions get into it. Respectable. Same with your and Mr. Gatza of BlazeVOX. Really interesting when viewing the Editor (capital E) as person, though I’ve never dealt with you, I glean from Pank blog-reads.
No.
Except there are some people who really wanna play kickball. They might be good or they might suck, but they really love playing kickball. And there’re those kids who’ve been on the field for longer, or who play so much everday the other kids know who they are, and they know their skills. And even if the new kids get to play, sometimes the other kids’ll compare them to the kids who are good and play everyday. And they might not be as good, but maybe one of these newer kids kicks the ball different…. one of these new kids uses the tip of his foot instead of soccer style.
But I believe you may be in the minority, in terms or not letting emotions get into it. Respectable. Same with your and Mr. Gatza of BlazeVOX. Really interesting when viewing the Editor (capital E) as person, though I’ve never dealt with you, I glean from Pank blog-reads.
i think it naive to say that prior knowledge of an individual does not influence an outcome (good or bad).
accepting/denying friends is easy i think.
accepting some one’s work despite your dislike for them seems like a harder task.
i work in IT and the above picture isn’t so bad. I’ve seen some crazy shit.
i think it naive to say that prior knowledge of an individual does not influence an outcome (good or bad).
accepting/denying friends is easy i think.
accepting some one’s work despite your dislike for them seems like a harder task.
i work in IT and the above picture isn’t so bad. I’ve seen some crazy shit.
I do not think that denying friends is easy. I think most editors do deny their friends, but it isn’t easy.
I do not think that denying friends is easy. I think most editors do deny their friends, but it isn’t easy.
well yeah saying no is always harder than i love you.
but maybe you misconstrue what a friend is. those people with the smile teeth and the firm fingergrasps are not inherently your friends despite how nice they may treat you in public.
well yeah saying no is always harder than i love you.
but maybe you misconstrue what a friend is. those people with the smile teeth and the firm fingergrasps are not inherently your friends despite how nice they may treat you in public.
Something tells me it goes in both directions. I’ve read some stuff that to me seems like running on pure inertia, stuff that doesn’t grab as much as other pieces in a journal’s set but has a name attached. As in, person X has been publishing a lot of stuff, and now I have something of theirs in my queue, I guess I should publish it too. Probably not always, maybe not even often, but odds are it happens.
At the same time, who cares. Such is life. Merit isn’t a definable constant.
It’s definitely not easy but most editors can and will do it, indeed.
Something tells me it goes in both directions. I’ve read some stuff that to me seems like running on pure inertia, stuff that doesn’t grab as much as other pieces in a journal’s set but has a name attached. As in, person X has been publishing a lot of stuff, and now I have something of theirs in my queue, I guess I should publish it too. Probably not always, maybe not even often, but odds are it happens.
At the same time, who cares. Such is life. Merit isn’t a definable constant.
It’s definitely not easy but most editors can and will do it, indeed.
Joe Young and I were talking about something similar this weekend at the bmore book fest. The Short Review – which I love – has the following language — “To ensure some measure of objectivity, we ask that none of our reviewers review the work of an author or publisher that they have any connection to (at least at the time of writing the review).”
Joe’s comment (and I’m paraphrasing, probably shittily) is how is that even possible these days? B/w facebook, twitter, zoetrope, fictionaut, etc., i have a connection to a lot of people.
That said, when I’m editing for JMWW…I try my best not to let prior knowledge/experience influence the outcome.
Joe Young and I were talking about something similar this weekend at the bmore book fest. The Short Review – which I love – has the following language — “To ensure some measure of objectivity, we ask that none of our reviewers review the work of an author or publisher that they have any connection to (at least at the time of writing the review).”
Joe’s comment (and I’m paraphrasing, probably shittily) is how is that even possible these days? B/w facebook, twitter, zoetrope, fictionaut, etc., i have a connection to a lot of people.
That said, when I’m editing for JMWW…I try my best not to let prior knowledge/experience influence the outcome.
people deny my friendship every day. my mom just yesterday laughed when i told her i loved her, said how cheap that is to say. my wife buys SS collections of writers i hate and then reads passages to me when i’m trying to nap.
people deny my friendship every day. my mom just yesterday laughed when i told her i loved her, said how cheap that is to say. my wife buys SS collections of writers i hate and then reads passages to me when i’m trying to nap.
(nodding) yes, sir, seen that a few times too.
and by no means is writing/getting published b/c editors know you/your work really different from the way people land jobs through friends/family/contacts.
(nodding) yes, sir, seen that a few times too.
and by no means is writing/getting published b/c editors know you/your work really different from the way people land jobs through friends/family/contacts.
I’m glad you wrote this. Publishing friends (or being published by them) has always been an issue for me, but then I say, “They’re my friends because I think what they do is amazing.”
I’m glad you wrote this. Publishing friends (or being published by them) has always been an issue for me, but then I say, “They’re my friends because I think what they do is amazing.”
In my opinion this both is and isn’t a problem. At the higher levels I don’t believe this really happens much and when it does it is because the editors know good writers. Sometimes getting a writer to submit to you is actually a favor to the magazine, not the writer. At the same time, there are certainly smaller magazines that are little more than vanity presses. Just have to be careful where you are sending.
In my opinion this both is and isn’t a problem. At the higher levels I don’t believe this really happens much and when it does it is because the editors know good writers. Sometimes getting a writer to submit to you is actually a favor to the magazine, not the writer. At the same time, there are certainly smaller magazines that are little more than vanity presses. Just have to be careful where you are sending.
why are people so mean?
why are people so mean?
Yeah, that’s really the thing. It’s so much easier to find that you are “connected” now. But what the heck is the nature of the connection, really? That we have some sort of tenuous Facebook thing, wherein I “befriended” someone because I liked a story of theirs from an issue of elimae a while back?
How many degrees of separation are their now that we all have access to almost everyone with access to a computer?
Yeah, that’s really the thing. It’s so much easier to find that you are “connected” now. But what the heck is the nature of the connection, really? That we have some sort of tenuous Facebook thing, wherein I “befriended” someone because I liked a story of theirs from an issue of elimae a while back?
How many degrees of separation are their now that we all have access to almost everyone with access to a computer?
What kind of bs is that? If you want objectivity, then read submissions blind. It’s not rocket science. The only reason for people not to do that is because they’re scared of rejecting something they don’t like from a big shot and feeling like an idiot after it gets picked up somewhere else.
What kind of bs is that? If you want objectivity, then read submissions blind. It’s not rocket science. The only reason for people not to do that is because they’re scared of rejecting something they don’t like from a big shot and feeling like an idiot after it gets picked up somewhere else.
It’s pretty intimidating when you’re outside of the circle.
It’s pretty intimidating when you’re outside of the circle.
People are probably more concerned with the proper etiquette to deal with bigger writers or friends. ie, you might expect your friend editor to give you a personal rejection even if they don’t take the piece.
People are probably more concerned with the proper etiquette to deal with bigger writers or friends. ie, you might expect your friend editor to give you a personal rejection even if they don’t take the piece.
i think the interesting question is…if ALL things are equal, you have Story A by Friend and Story B by Stranger, and you like them both about the same, both are similar, both fill a niche in the rag the same way, both are about 2800 words, in other words, the same, which way do you lean? i often publish my friends because i really dig their shit, but i’ve also rejected same said friends when all things were equal to let a NEW voice get in
it’s tough…but i think we all just try to do the best we can with what comes in
i’ve also had to reject some writers that had some REALLY impressive bios, it did give me pause “should i publish her/him?” LOOK at where they’ve been, what is WRONG with me that i’m not loving this story? is it just some slop they had lying around?
you publish and are accepted for the most part based on a really powerful read
period
great topic though roxane
i think the interesting question is…if ALL things are equal, you have Story A by Friend and Story B by Stranger, and you like them both about the same, both are similar, both fill a niche in the rag the same way, both are about 2800 words, in other words, the same, which way do you lean? i often publish my friends because i really dig their shit, but i’ve also rejected same said friends when all things were equal to let a NEW voice get in
it’s tough…but i think we all just try to do the best we can with what comes in
i’ve also had to reject some writers that had some REALLY impressive bios, it did give me pause “should i publish her/him?” LOOK at where they’ve been, what is WRONG with me that i’m not loving this story? is it just some slop they had lying around?
you publish and are accepted for the most part based on a really powerful read
period
great topic though roxane
Fair enough. Though even if you read blind, when it comes time to respond, you could still give your writer friends a personal rejection. Or, if not, I would think it’d be hard to fault a friend for form-rejecting you if they didn’t know it was you.
Fair enough. Though even if you read blind, when it comes time to respond, you could still give your writer friends a personal rejection. Or, if not, I would think it’d be hard to fault a friend for form-rejecting you if they didn’t know it was you.
I remember hearing an NPR segment with James Wood, Fiction critic for the New Yorker, and he was talking about how he liked to keep his distance with writers he knew he was criticizing, to keep a certain level of objective coldness with them. He said it was harder to criticize if he were friends with the author.
But I don’t know, I tend to critique my friends’ work more harshly, I think, because I know them more, and expect/want more from them.
I remember hearing an NPR segment with James Wood, Fiction critic for the New Yorker, and he was talking about how he liked to keep his distance with writers he knew he was criticizing, to keep a certain level of objective coldness with them. He said it was harder to criticize if he were friends with the author.
But I don’t know, I tend to critique my friends’ work more harshly, I think, because I know them more, and expect/want more from them.
Hm, reading submissions is hard work, and very few people get paid to do it. Sit down and read 500 stories that are an average of 14 pages in length and see what techniques you develop to quicken the process.
If I know a writer in the slush pile then I might pull them out of the slush pile. After that the story is the only thing that matters.
Out of a batch of 500 my second-read pile is about 30-40.
My third read pile is about 10-15.
At that point names mean shit.
My job is to pass along stories I think are the best fit for the magazine. If I hand up a story that isn’t accepted (either for content, form, style, etc.) then I look bad.
Hm, reading submissions is hard work, and very few people get paid to do it. Sit down and read 500 stories that are an average of 14 pages in length and see what techniques you develop to quicken the process.
If I know a writer in the slush pile then I might pull them out of the slush pile. After that the story is the only thing that matters.
Out of a batch of 500 my second-read pile is about 30-40.
My third read pile is about 10-15.
At that point names mean shit.
My job is to pass along stories I think are the best fit for the magazine. If I hand up a story that isn’t accepted (either for content, form, style, etc.) then I look bad.
I worried about this once I started getting to know people but what you said is so right. My friends are brilliant. It’s not their fault that they know me.
I worried about this once I started getting to know people but what you said is so right. My friends are brilliant. It’s not their fault that they know me.
I can see that too. At AWP, I didn’t know anyone and no one knew me so I just sat at my little table, doing my thing, feeling invisible. It was very intimidating.
I can see that too. At AWP, I didn’t know anyone and no one knew me so I just sat at my little table, doing my thing, feeling invisible. It was very intimidating.
You tend to become friends with people whose work you admire, whether real friends or electron friends. But really, I feel like it’s too complicated. Who has the time to sift through all their motivations, submotivations, and antimotivations all the time? I’m tired just typing that.
You tend to become friends with people whose work you admire, whether real friends or electron friends. But really, I feel like it’s too complicated. Who has the time to sift through all their motivations, submotivations, and antimotivations all the time? I’m tired just typing that.
I have to say: I’m thinking about submitting to JMWW. I Like David. I think David likes me. What does that equal in my expectation? That my story will be read, just like every story that comes from someone he has never heard of. That is all. At best, having some connection with an editor might mean getting a slightly more personal note when you are rejected.
I subbed to a friends magazine once, and got:
“Nate,
Glad to see your name in the inbox. This story has a lot going for us, but at this time it does not quite fit for us. I’m sure you’ll place it elsewhere. Thanks and think of us again.”
The “Glad to see your name in the inbox. ” was, I think, what knowing the guy bought me. That was all I hoped for.
I have to say: I’m thinking about submitting to JMWW. I Like David. I think David likes me. What does that equal in my expectation? That my story will be read, just like every story that comes from someone he has never heard of. That is all. At best, having some connection with an editor might mean getting a slightly more personal note when you are rejected.
I subbed to a friends magazine once, and got:
“Nate,
Glad to see your name in the inbox. This story has a lot going for us, but at this time it does not quite fit for us. I’m sure you’ll place it elsewhere. Thanks and think of us again.”
The “Glad to see your name in the inbox. ” was, I think, what knowing the guy bought me. That was all I hoped for.
I’ll admit, 3 or 4 years ago, I probably would have been on the anti-nepotism/croneyism bandwagon, but then again, 3 or 4 years ago, I wouldn’t have liked to read a lot of what I like to read today. And, I thought writing/publishing/etc. a lot more serious, noble endeavor, not to be diluted by nepotism and yadda yadda yadda.
Now, I’m more of the opinion that good writing getting published is good writing getting published. Shit, the Beats were croneys, and the ex-Pats, etc. We don’t mind that in retrospect. We don’t even mind Twain’s self-publishing. Why why should we mind similar practices now in current-spect?
I’ll admit, 3 or 4 years ago, I probably would have been on the anti-nepotism/croneyism bandwagon, but then again, 3 or 4 years ago, I wouldn’t have liked to read a lot of what I like to read today. And, I thought writing/publishing/etc. a lot more serious, noble endeavor, not to be diluted by nepotism and yadda yadda yadda.
Now, I’m more of the opinion that good writing getting published is good writing getting published. Shit, the Beats were croneys, and the ex-Pats, etc. We don’t mind that in retrospect. We don’t even mind Twain’s self-publishing. Why why should we mind similar practices now in current-spect?
all good points
all good points
that is plain unethical.
i will be your friend david.
that is plain unethical.
i will be your friend david.
The Northville Review has a couple of readers who don’t give a rat’s ass about indie lit social networks, and aren’t at all a part of any scene related to them. Whenever my objectivity might be called into question for whatever reason, it goes to one or both of them blind and with no comment. So far, they’ve always confirmed my gut feelings about a submission. Yes, really. (Note: I am less successful in areas such as organization and healthy living.)
All of that said, it’s a peculiar environment in which we operate. There are not many other avocations one can have where their output is judged formally and all the time by fellow practitioners. As much as I (and others, looks like) separate the work from its creators on the editorial end, it still boggles me on a daily basis as a writer. Where *is* the perimeter of the circle, anyway?
The Northville Review has a couple of readers who don’t give a rat’s ass about indie lit social networks, and aren’t at all a part of any scene related to them. Whenever my objectivity might be called into question for whatever reason, it goes to one or both of them blind and with no comment. So far, they’ve always confirmed my gut feelings about a submission. Yes, really. (Note: I am less successful in areas such as organization and healthy living.)
All of that said, it’s a peculiar environment in which we operate. There are not many other avocations one can have where their output is judged formally and all the time by fellow practitioners. As much as I (and others, looks like) separate the work from its creators on the editorial end, it still boggles me on a daily basis as a writer. Where *is* the perimeter of the circle, anyway?
i’ll blow you if you
accept this comment as a
haiku on that site
i’ll blow you if you
accept this comment as a
haiku on that site
crap that comment didn’t wind up where i wanted it to. nathan i don’t want to blow you cuz you don’t edit JMWW. it was david erlewine i was gonna blow.
crap that comment didn’t wind up where i wanted it to. nathan i don’t want to blow you cuz you don’t edit JMWW. it was david erlewine i was gonna blow.
Well shit. There goes my weekend
Well shit. There goes my weekend
i feel a lot of anxiety about this
i wrote a little about it here: http://htmlgiant.com/?p=3897
i think the points about making friends with people because you like their work and the points about the role of community in literature throughout history are the two points that make me feel better
i feel a lot of anxiety about this
i wrote a little about it here: http://htmlgiant.com/?p=3897
i think the points about making friends with people because you like their work and the points about the role of community in literature throughout history are the two points that make me feel better
What about magazines like Noon, which have a particular aesthetic, and which publish many of the same writers again and again, some of whom are on the masthead? I don’t mind. Christine Schutt, Diane Williams, and friends deliver every time.
The New Yorker has a stable of writers. So does Harper’s. So do Esquire and GQ. Part of the reason I buy these magazines is because they do, and they are good stables, and I hope I’ll get to read, say, the new Edwidge Danticat in the new New Yorker, or the new John Jeremiah Sullivan in GQ.
There is nothing wrong with magazines that don’t have regular writers, and as a writer who isn’t yet hugely established, I’m so glad to have the chance to break in. But neither is there anything wrong with magazines developing relationships with good writers and hoping for and encouraging repeat submissions, and treating those submissions with great care, and cultivating those writers because the merit of their work has earned such care and cultivation.
Anybody, really, could make work of such merit that editors are longing for more of it and reading what arrives with greater care. This is true in any profession, by the way. If Frank Gehry submits an architectural proposal, and you have 300 other architectural proposals on your desk, you’re going to be eager to see what Gehry sent. It may not be what you choose, but you know it’s going to be somehow interesting. And if you don’t choose Gehry, you’re going to call him on the phone, thank him for submitting, tell him what you liked about the proposal, tell him why you’re going to pass, and invite him to try again. You’d be dumb not to do so.
Architects get to know other architects. Writers get to know other writers. Architects want to know the other architects whose work has moved them. Writers want to know the other writers whose work has moved them. They write each other fan letters and talk shop at conferences. Then they begin to get acquainted. They are interested in the work of the writers with whom they are acquainted. This is human and natural. I’m not editing a magazine any more, but if I was, and Blake Butler sent me something, I would read it as soon as it arrived and get back with him quickly, because I am interested in his work, and I am also interested in him. Why? Because his work is interesting, and he has made himself interesting in a way that interests me. And by God I want my magazine to be full of things that are interesting to me, and how lucky, I’d think, that Blake sent me something, and I hope he will do it again.
The good news for everybody is this: You can make yourself interesting and part of the loops in which you hope to be looped by making interesting things and sending them out into the world, where, if they really are interesting, they will interest people, and those people will get interested in you and your work.
What about magazines like Noon, which have a particular aesthetic, and which publish many of the same writers again and again, some of whom are on the masthead? I don’t mind. Christine Schutt, Diane Williams, and friends deliver every time.
The New Yorker has a stable of writers. So does Harper’s. So do Esquire and GQ. Part of the reason I buy these magazines is because they do, and they are good stables, and I hope I’ll get to read, say, the new Edwidge Danticat in the new New Yorker, or the new John Jeremiah Sullivan in GQ.
There is nothing wrong with magazines that don’t have regular writers, and as a writer who isn’t yet hugely established, I’m so glad to have the chance to break in. But neither is there anything wrong with magazines developing relationships with good writers and hoping for and encouraging repeat submissions, and treating those submissions with great care, and cultivating those writers because the merit of their work has earned such care and cultivation.
Anybody, really, could make work of such merit that editors are longing for more of it and reading what arrives with greater care. This is true in any profession, by the way. If Frank Gehry submits an architectural proposal, and you have 300 other architectural proposals on your desk, you’re going to be eager to see what Gehry sent. It may not be what you choose, but you know it’s going to be somehow interesting. And if you don’t choose Gehry, you’re going to call him on the phone, thank him for submitting, tell him what you liked about the proposal, tell him why you’re going to pass, and invite him to try again. You’d be dumb not to do so.
Architects get to know other architects. Writers get to know other writers. Architects want to know the other architects whose work has moved them. Writers want to know the other writers whose work has moved them. They write each other fan letters and talk shop at conferences. Then they begin to get acquainted. They are interested in the work of the writers with whom they are acquainted. This is human and natural. I’m not editing a magazine any more, but if I was, and Blake Butler sent me something, I would read it as soon as it arrived and get back with him quickly, because I am interested in his work, and I am also interested in him. Why? Because his work is interesting, and he has made himself interesting in a way that interests me. And by God I want my magazine to be full of things that are interesting to me, and how lucky, I’d think, that Blake sent me something, and I hope he will do it again.
The good news for everybody is this: You can make yourself interesting and part of the loops in which you hope to be looped by making interesting things and sending them out into the world, where, if they really are interesting, they will interest people, and those people will get interested in you and your work.
[…] HTML Giant has an interesting conversation about nepotism in the indie lit community. You should joi… […]
i’ll buy that.
i’ll buy that.
plus all those other industry folks have a lot more at stake. we get contributor copies. they often get millions.
plus all those other industry folks have a lot more at stake. we get contributor copies. they often get millions.
yeah i hear ya mike.
sometimes when i’m feeling decisive and ass-like, i think, “just don’t be friends with writers who you don’t think are good.”
other times i feel like that’s a crock of shit. i mean, how elitist is that?
in general, i think what adam robinson said is also how i feel. be friends with people who you think are amazing.
when i was in grad school, my favorite writers in the program were also my best friends because i thought they were doing awesome shit and because i really enjoyed being around them. part of doing awesome shit, i think, carries over into being enjoyable to be around and vice-versa. of course everybody has different views on what sorts of people you enjoy being around, the same way there are different views on what awesome shit is. and of course there are some people who are enjoyable to be around but can’t write worth a lick. but i’ve found we generally can’t hang out long enough to really become “friends” with each other. so do i really enjoy being around them? i like being around them ok enough, sure, but not as much as my “real” friends.
basically i feel there’s a strong connection between the two, people you want to be around and people you want to read. both are people you want to spend some time with
yeah i hear ya mike.
sometimes when i’m feeling decisive and ass-like, i think, “just don’t be friends with writers who you don’t think are good.”
other times i feel like that’s a crock of shit. i mean, how elitist is that?
in general, i think what adam robinson said is also how i feel. be friends with people who you think are amazing.
when i was in grad school, my favorite writers in the program were also my best friends because i thought they were doing awesome shit and because i really enjoyed being around them. part of doing awesome shit, i think, carries over into being enjoyable to be around and vice-versa. of course everybody has different views on what sorts of people you enjoy being around, the same way there are different views on what awesome shit is. and of course there are some people who are enjoyable to be around but can’t write worth a lick. but i’ve found we generally can’t hang out long enough to really become “friends” with each other. so do i really enjoy being around them? i like being around them ok enough, sure, but not as much as my “real” friends.
basically i feel there’s a strong connection between the two, people you want to be around and people you want to read. both are people you want to spend some time with
yes yes and yes. damn, couldn’t have put it better, i don’t think
yes yes and yes. damn, couldn’t have put it better, i don’t think
kyle busts it out again. and thanks kyle. speaking of which, you should look at the reopened no colony call for subs :P http://www.nocolony.com
kyle busts it out again. and thanks kyle. speaking of which, you should look at the reopened no colony call for subs :P http://www.nocolony.com
I don’t disagree with anything you’ve said above, but i’d point out that having a stable of writers is different than publishing one’s friends. Diane Williams discovered most of the writers who form the core of NOON, she didn’t start the magazine in order to publish them. Ditto with the New Yorker, whose editors may not have been the first to publish people like George Saunders, but who championed them early on and developed a relationship with them post publishing.
Of course, sometimes they are friends or as you say, on the masthead. I guess it really just comes down to a question of quality. If you are publishing quality people it doesn’t matter who they are.
I don’t disagree with anything you’ve said above, but i’d point out that having a stable of writers is different than publishing one’s friends. Diane Williams discovered most of the writers who form the core of NOON, she didn’t start the magazine in order to publish them. Ditto with the New Yorker, whose editors may not have been the first to publish people like George Saunders, but who championed them early on and developed a relationship with them post publishing.
Of course, sometimes they are friends or as you say, on the masthead. I guess it really just comes down to a question of quality. If you are publishing quality people it doesn’t matter who they are.
“have no friends not equal to yourself.” — some old asian dude
“have no friends not equal to yourself.” — some old asian dude
Being a social inadequate with no friends either virtual or of flesh and bone, I am just going to sit here quietly and wait for my mother to get online and start a litmag. Then I might stand a chance of featuring in a publication. Provided she’s forgiven me for pouring bleach on her pot plants when I was a sullen teenager, of course.
Being a social inadequate with no friends either virtual or of flesh and bone, I am just going to sit here quietly and wait for my mother to get online and start a litmag. Then I might stand a chance of featuring in a publication. Provided she’s forgiven me for pouring bleach on her pot plants when I was a sullen teenager, of course.
ha, good
not that it really relates but this made me think of that hemingway line: “an intelligent man is sometimes forced to be drunk to spend time with his fools.”
ha, good
not that it really relates but this made me think of that hemingway line: “an intelligent man is sometimes forced to be drunk to spend time with his fools.”
I find I have increasing respect for the people who publish magazines I’d never before heard of and a somewhat decreasing respect for those I do. Underground Library has been serving me better in the discovery of new reading, recently, than did previously my friends’ reccomendations via blogs and whatever.
Recently a friend, like someone I’ve been to bars with more than once, crashed on his couch, etc, tried to muscle me out of a controversial decision I made. I get the feeling our friendship will be tainted for a couple years over this, but I won’t change my decision and he will live with it one way or another.
The last issue of dispatch was by a first-timer. That meant A LOT more editing and work on my part, but the product shined as well or better than some of the more established writers I’ve published.
Roxanne’s “so what” comment is demonstrative of a defense mechanism she’ll flatly deny. Truth is that J. A. Tyler publishes in all kinds of places where he has no friends while Gay and many of us here publish almost exclusively with people we know. Tyler is the gold standard and the fact that he won’t partake in this discussion is only further evidence of that. I want to be more like him than I want to be like Blake Butler.
I find I have increasing respect for the people who publish magazines I’d never before heard of and a somewhat decreasing respect for those I do. Underground Library has been serving me better in the discovery of new reading, recently, than did previously my friends’ reccomendations via blogs and whatever.
Recently a friend, like someone I’ve been to bars with more than once, crashed on his couch, etc, tried to muscle me out of a controversial decision I made. I get the feeling our friendship will be tainted for a couple years over this, but I won’t change my decision and he will live with it one way or another.
The last issue of dispatch was by a first-timer. That meant A LOT more editing and work on my part, but the product shined as well or better than some of the more established writers I’ve published.
Roxanne’s “so what” comment is demonstrative of a defense mechanism she’ll flatly deny. Truth is that J. A. Tyler publishes in all kinds of places where he has no friends while Gay and many of us here publish almost exclusively with people we know. Tyler is the gold standard and the fact that he won’t partake in this discussion is only further evidence of that. I want to be more like him than I want to be like Blake Butler.
No snark, but can you reword your first sentence? I’m having a hell of a time trying to figure out what you meant. You have increasing respect for people who are publishers of magazine you don’t know of? Or you have increasing respect for people you know who publish in magazines you don’t know of?
No snark, but can you reword your first sentence? I’m having a hell of a time trying to figure out what you meant. You have increasing respect for people who are publishers of magazine you don’t know of? Or you have increasing respect for people you know who publish in magazines you don’t know of?
The former.
The former.
try to want to be more like yourself than any other paul.
that’s where i would start.
try to want to be more like yourself than any other paul.
that’s where i would start.
JUST ONCE, would you spell my name correctly?
JUST ONCE, would you spell my name correctly?
Many journals that I read and am aware of (not the american literary field) gratuitously publish the same authors over and over because for many journals that’s one of the few methods they have of maintaining a certain readership, a readership largely constituted by writers and writers’ friends. This to me is an enormous problem that is not going to go away. As much as I appreciate all of the comments above about an editor’s right and the positive aspects of publishing contacts, we must always remember the mass of writers that are being excluded. I know of one journal in particular that publishes a collection of authors from a retinue of thirty to forty authors every quarter, and very rarely see fiction or poetry by new authors appear. And it is one of the most lauded journals in Australia. And yes, it is of a high standard and contains some exceptional work, but seeing the same authors in the contents page actually deters me from buying a copy.
Many journals that I read and am aware of (not the american literary field) gratuitously publish the same authors over and over because for many journals that’s one of the few methods they have of maintaining a certain readership, a readership largely constituted by writers and writers’ friends. This to me is an enormous problem that is not going to go away. As much as I appreciate all of the comments above about an editor’s right and the positive aspects of publishing contacts, we must always remember the mass of writers that are being excluded. I know of one journal in particular that publishes a collection of authors from a retinue of thirty to forty authors every quarter, and very rarely see fiction or poetry by new authors appear. And it is one of the most lauded journals in Australia. And yes, it is of a high standard and contains some exceptional work, but seeing the same authors in the contents page actually deters me from buying a copy.
From your tone, I imagine his answer is probably “no,” but you know he only adds the second ‘n’ out of love.
From your tone, I imagine his answer is probably “no,” but you know he only adds the second ‘n’ out of love.
Ha.
Ha.
The work is everything. Thom Jones had little contacts, he was a janitor and just decided he was going to write stories that they couldn’t reject. Of course it’s one thing to decide and the next to pay off. Rewrite, rewrite. Carol Oates rejected The Pugilist at Rest because of the Schopenhaur references. I’m sure there are millions of these stories. You can’t please them all.
The work is everything. Thom Jones had little contacts, he was a janitor and just decided he was going to write stories that they couldn’t reject. Of course it’s one thing to decide and the next to pay off. Rewrite, rewrite. Carol Oates rejected The Pugilist at Rest because of the Schopenhaur references. I’m sure there are millions of these stories. You can’t please them all.
dave, i think thats a short story all by itself.
dave, i think thats a short story all by itself.
you all are kind. Audri, I don’t think you mean your offer of friendship the way Boggs did in Shawshank. I will assume you don’t.
The part about my wife is sort of embellished as it would involve her reading fiction. my mom isn’t a bad gal, all and all. she’s proud i’m writing….she’s just not reading any of it (not a bad thing for everyone).
you all are kind. Audri, I don’t think you mean your offer of friendship the way Boggs did in Shawshank. I will assume you don’t.
The part about my wife is sort of embellished as it would involve her reading fiction. my mom isn’t a bad gal, all and all. she’s proud i’m writing….she’s just not reading any of it (not a bad thing for everyone).
“The ‘Glad to see your name in the inbox. ‘ was, I think, what knowing the guy bought me. That was all I hoped for.”
Perfectly said, Nate.
Hmm, re “reading blind,” i don’t know…you read enough of people’s work and sometimes you “Know” who it is (a story about a malaise-filled stutterer…damn, now who could that be?).
Anyway, I had this thing come up for the SHort Review when I reviewed Spencer Dew’s collection. I was his FB friend and had appeared in the Dave Barringer antho with him (and reached out to him b/c dug his essay in the antho and b/c my brother taught near Chicago where Spencer lives). Tania said that kind of connection was fine…and I really think she’s trying to limit situations where great friends for years are reviewing each other’s works. the line gets blurry tho, pho sho.
and nate, definitely submit, thanks. if you flash published in jmww, people can point to this and say the buddy system is bs!
“The ‘Glad to see your name in the inbox. ‘ was, I think, what knowing the guy bought me. That was all I hoped for.”
Perfectly said, Nate.
Hmm, re “reading blind,” i don’t know…you read enough of people’s work and sometimes you “Know” who it is (a story about a malaise-filled stutterer…damn, now who could that be?).
Anyway, I had this thing come up for the SHort Review when I reviewed Spencer Dew’s collection. I was his FB friend and had appeared in the Dave Barringer antho with him (and reached out to him b/c dug his essay in the antho and b/c my brother taught near Chicago where Spencer lives). Tania said that kind of connection was fine…and I really think she’s trying to limit situations where great friends for years are reviewing each other’s works. the line gets blurry tho, pho sho.
and nate, definitely submit, thanks. if you flash published in jmww, people can point to this and say the buddy system is bs!
“was gonna”
now my weekend is blown
“was gonna”
now my weekend is blown
that is a great way to put it, adam. exactly, if you hang out with great writers and they send you work, it’s insane you should be tougher on them. that’s like those high school coaches who are terrified to start their VERY TALENTED kids b/c other parents will say “hmm, wonder why he’s playing?”
that is a great way to put it, adam. exactly, if you hang out with great writers and they send you work, it’s insane you should be tougher on them. that’s like those high school coaches who are terrified to start their VERY TALENTED kids b/c other parents will say “hmm, wonder why he’s playing?”
i’m starting to do that too, Landon, working them harder, demanding more, etc. killing them with comments.
ha! hope i quoted you accurately yo
i’m starting to do that too, Landon, working them harder, demanding more, etc. killing them with comments.
ha! hope i quoted you accurately yo
kyle, you should think before writing. ha ha, you nail every thread! i need to just follow your advice on the whole thing and call it a day. tip of the cap to you. d
kyle, you should think before writing. ha ha, you nail every thread! i need to just follow your advice on the whole thing and call it a day. tip of the cap to you. d
HEY BABY got caught writing a letter to his girl …
Thom Jones is a fucking badass, that collection I gotta pull out tonight and read again. Even Cold Snap I liked a lot of, though not as much.
Great get, Greg Gerke.
HEY BABY got caught writing a letter to his girl …
Thom Jones is a fucking badass, that collection I gotta pull out tonight and read again. Even Cold Snap I liked a lot of, though not as much.
Great get, Greg Gerke.
long live Thom Jones… both of them…. singing and writing……
long live Thom Jones… both of them…. singing and writing……
well yeah, i love thom jones, and he was a janitor, except he did get his MFA at iowa before he became a janitor… “i want to live!’ is one of my favorite stories ever
well yeah, i love thom jones, and he was a janitor, except he did get his MFA at iowa before he became a janitor… “i want to live!’ is one of my favorite stories ever
i want to live is a classic, no doubt about it
i often feel like a janitor at home
i want to live is a classic, no doubt about it
i often feel like a janitor at home
Yes, David, I do think you have cornered the tortured stutterer market for now. If I see one in my inbox, you know I’ll think it’s you. And there are some people I read from who are just so damn weird that I could pick them out of a lineup easily.
But other than that, I mean…people read dozens of random tortured everyday sort of epiphanies, all in a row, with no indication or the source?—it would certainly make an ID difficult.
Yes, David, I do think you have cornered the tortured stutterer market for now. If I see one in my inbox, you know I’ll think it’s you. And there are some people I read from who are just so damn weird that I could pick them out of a lineup easily.
But other than that, I mean…people read dozens of random tortured everyday sort of epiphanies, all in a row, with no indication or the source?—it would certainly make an ID difficult.
Wow, I am up late, reading some of this and I have my own feelings about this. I hate networking and croneyism. I think the work has to speak for itself. If you don’t write a good story in the first place, it’s not going to get published. That said, I have had one good break from a friend who loved a story of mine and published it. I will be forever grateful to that person for giving me a publishing credit besides the rural newspaper called Hard Row to Hoe (love those guys, too), but I’m still proud of that first weird, long story. Also, I think that writers could read each others work and support. I try to read the work of people I’ve met because I think this is the one-go-round. Better to read the work of people on the street right along with the giants. I hope I’ll always be a working writer, one who doesn’t have to know someone in order to get my stuff read. I like the prayer “Do not compare yourself to others lest you become vain or bitter.” It helps when I start looking at all the books being published and start thinking crap like, oh he just knows him, or that’s really self-publishing. If I ever do self-publish, I hope I have the guts to stand by my stuff and say–hey, I published it because I wanted to. Hope this makes sense and I don’t sound like a jackass. Don’t want to hurt my publishing potential.
Wow, I am up late, reading some of this and I have my own feelings about this. I hate networking and croneyism. I think the work has to speak for itself. If you don’t write a good story in the first place, it’s not going to get published. That said, I have had one good break from a friend who loved a story of mine and published it. I will be forever grateful to that person for giving me a publishing credit besides the rural newspaper called Hard Row to Hoe (love those guys, too), but I’m still proud of that first weird, long story. Also, I think that writers could read each others work and support. I try to read the work of people I’ve met because I think this is the one-go-round. Better to read the work of people on the street right along with the giants. I hope I’ll always be a working writer, one who doesn’t have to know someone in order to get my stuff read. I like the prayer “Do not compare yourself to others lest you become vain or bitter.” It helps when I start looking at all the books being published and start thinking crap like, oh he just knows him, or that’s really self-publishing. If I ever do self-publish, I hope I have the guts to stand by my stuff and say–hey, I published it because I wanted to. Hope this makes sense and I don’t sound like a jackass. Don’t want to hurt my publishing potential.
can somebody put me in their stable? my mane’s all knotty
can somebody put me in their stable? my mane’s all knotty
I was struck by two things that Roxane said:
“We all know each other, right?”
“I can see that too. At AWP, I didn’t know anyone and no one knew me so I just sat at my little table, doing my thing, feeling invisible. It was very intimidating.”
I love reading Pank, and the Pank blog, and suspect I would like Roxane if I met her, but that first sentence seemed to me to reflect a bit of croneyism or elitism. Of course all of you on the inside know each other. That’s the point. But quite possibly there are other writers of merit, who might not easily slip inside that circle. Perhaps they are shy or awkward, or very old or very young, who don’t go to bars or have the wrong political views or don’t understand the hip references, and would feel, like Roxane says she did at AWP, invisible and intimidated among you. I am not saying that many editors may not give those writers equal consideration. But I suspect that being on the inside of the indie publishing scene is a result of more than just talent, and that being on the inside does confer its benefits.
I was struck by two things that Roxane said:
“We all know each other, right?”
“I can see that too. At AWP, I didn’t know anyone and no one knew me so I just sat at my little table, doing my thing, feeling invisible. It was very intimidating.”
I love reading Pank, and the Pank blog, and suspect I would like Roxane if I met her, but that first sentence seemed to me to reflect a bit of croneyism or elitism. Of course all of you on the inside know each other. That’s the point. But quite possibly there are other writers of merit, who might not easily slip inside that circle. Perhaps they are shy or awkward, or very old or very young, who don’t go to bars or have the wrong political views or don’t understand the hip references, and would feel, like Roxane says she did at AWP, invisible and intimidated among you. I am not saying that many editors may not give those writers equal consideration. But I suspect that being on the inside of the indie publishing scene is a result of more than just talent, and that being on the inside does confer its benefits.
It’s just a matter of hanging around long enough.
It’s just a matter of hanging around long enough.
Roxxane,
Interesting post, and something we briefly considered when we started up. I often don’t read bio information until I’m finished with a piece, and then only consult to find out whether the person gets a personal response (a personal into deserves a personal response, I think).
I’ve actually started to see an inverse ratio between the quality of the work and the length of the bio.
Roxxane,
Interesting post, and something we briefly considered when we started up. I often don’t read bio information until I’m finished with a piece, and then only consult to find out whether the person gets a personal response (a personal into deserves a personal response, I think).
I’ve actually started to see an inverse ratio between the quality of the work and the length of the bio.
heh, jason, i like the “inverse ratio” line.
my favorite is the kind where the dude lists about 95 places and then says AND MANY OTHERS.
when i see those, i want to yell “SCREW YOU” like timothy hutton did in that movie where mary tyler moore was a real bitch.
heh, jason, i like the “inverse ratio” line.
my favorite is the kind where the dude lists about 95 places and then says AND MANY OTHERS.
when i see those, i want to yell “SCREW YOU” like timothy hutton did in that movie where mary tyler moore was a real bitch.
jamey, nice to see you on here (as well as fictionaut)
good thoughts, all, none jackassy
jamey, nice to see you on here (as well as fictionaut)
good thoughts, all, none jackassy
The less you publish your friends, the less friends you have, so an anti-nepotism policy gets progressively easier.
The less you publish your friends, the less friends you have, so an anti-nepotism policy gets progressively easier.
If people stopped publishing themselves and their friends, 90 percent of publishing would dry up…then maybe we could breathe again and the real quality could have a chance to be noticed…of course this will never happen…
notesofatroll.blogspot.com
If people stopped publishing themselves and their friends, 90 percent of publishing would dry up…then maybe we could breathe again and the real quality could have a chance to be noticed…of course this will never happen…
notesofatroll.blogspot.com
how do people become friends
how do people become friends
People become friends because they are like-minded, and there are too many like-minded people in the world publishing like-minded poetry. Publishing is too easy, and there just isn’t enough good writing to fill up all these zines. So, “editors” fill them with mediocrity. They have to. Then they call the mediocrity great. All the like-minded people agree with that assessment. There are varieties of gray all through this, of course, and exceptions, etc. But, in general everyone sees it happening, this blog is a perfect example. It’s the same thing that is happening everywhere, teamwork over individualism, collegiality over quality. Your staff writers talk about their friends, you see the same names over and over again, some guy’s talking about how great Michael Madsen’s poetry is and how he wants to fuck him. Everyone talking here is simply trying to get “inside”. It’s a good time, it looks like, but quality slips further and further. People like J.A. Tyler become the “gold standard” which is a complete joke. It’s all so dull…
People become friends because they are like-minded, and there are too many like-minded people in the world publishing like-minded poetry. Publishing is too easy, and there just isn’t enough good writing to fill up all these zines. So, “editors” fill them with mediocrity. They have to. Then they call the mediocrity great. All the like-minded people agree with that assessment. There are varieties of gray all through this, of course, and exceptions, etc. But, in general everyone sees it happening, this blog is a perfect example. It’s the same thing that is happening everywhere, teamwork over individualism, collegiality over quality. Your staff writers talk about their friends, you see the same names over and over again, some guy’s talking about how great Michael Madsen’s poetry is and how he wants to fuck him. Everyone talking here is simply trying to get “inside”. It’s a good time, it looks like, but quality slips further and further. People like J.A. Tyler become the “gold standard” which is a complete joke. It’s all so dull…
You should pray daily that you can write something with half the gold in Tyler’s writing, shithead.
You should pray daily that you can write something with half the gold in Tyler’s writing, shithead.
That’s fool’s gold, Madore. Tyler is pure style, no content. He has a smooth, poetic style, to me it seems like Cormac McCarthy without a story. He just blows and blows, you read it and you don’t laugh, you don’t cry, you don’t get angry…it’s fluff…I could pick out a specific piece and criticize it but I think I’ll save that for my blog…or maybe a column for your wonderful Girls With Insurance…
That’s fool’s gold, Madore. Tyler is pure style, no content. He has a smooth, poetic style, to me it seems like Cormac McCarthy without a story. He just blows and blows, you read it and you don’t laugh, you don’t cry, you don’t get angry…it’s fluff…I could pick out a specific piece and criticize it but I think I’ll save that for my blog…or maybe a column for your wonderful Girls With Insurance…
Mather, have you ever edited a magazine or anthology? I’m curious as to your actual functional experience.
Mather, have you ever edited a magazine or anthology? I’m curious as to your actual functional experience.
by incessantly emailing someone else until they email back.
duh.
also threats.
by incessantly emailing someone else until they email back.
duh.
also threats.
i will check back on yr blog. i’m curious about why you feel this way about j.a.
i will check back on yr blog. i’m curious about why you feel this way about j.a.
“no content”. after reading your stuff, seems like you tend to spell things out and if J.A doesnt then hes not worth your time. its pure style if you dont get it.
also “you dont laugh, you dont cry, you dont get angry”, maybe you dont but i think a lot of people do so its probably best not to impose that on them, they can make up their own minds.
“no content”. after reading your stuff, seems like you tend to spell things out and if J.A doesnt then hes not worth your time. its pure style if you dont get it.
also “you dont laugh, you dont cry, you dont get angry”, maybe you dont but i think a lot of people do so its probably best not to impose that on them, they can make up their own minds.
No, they can’t make up their own minds. They must listen to me and do everything I say and think exactly as I think.
I have nothing personal against J.A. Tyler, there are worse writers, but what I really can’t stand is a culture that elevates people to a status they don’t deserve. The fact is he is not as good as his credits seem to indicate, and nowhere near as good as “Gold standard”. Everyone is so desperate for heros…
No, they can’t make up their own minds. They must listen to me and do everything I say and think exactly as I think.
I have nothing personal against J.A. Tyler, there are worse writers, but what I really can’t stand is a culture that elevates people to a status they don’t deserve. The fact is he is not as good as his credits seem to indicate, and nowhere near as good as “Gold standard”. Everyone is so desperate for heros…
i think the “gold standard” should consist of people who can spell heroes
i think the “gold standard” should consist of people who can spell heroes
excellent point, Ben, excellent point
excellent point, Ben, excellent point
“Publishing is too easy, and there just isn’t enough good writing to fill up all these zines.”
You are correct, but so what?
Dont’ read crappy zines with bad writing. Those zines ultimately don’t mean much in terms of an audience or prestige anyway, so I’m not sure why you think they affect the publishing world that much.
“Publishing is too easy, and there just isn’t enough good writing to fill up all these zines.”
You are correct, but so what?
Dont’ read crappy zines with bad writing. Those zines ultimately don’t mean much in terms of an audience or prestige anyway, so I’m not sure why you think they affect the publishing world that much.
who or what is the gold standard, Mather?
you’re so harsh to criticize everyone and everything you don’t think is the epitome of soul or whatever weird standard you have. it doesn’t seem like your poetry is very poetic to me. there’s no good or unique imagery. bukowski had that. he had the blunt paragraph like you but then he had some verbal gems to mix it up. your stuff is sort of like a laundry list to me. just because something is a different style than yours doesn’t mean you have to lash out against it so aggressively.
it’s like what matthew mathers said, “but stan why are you so mad?”
who or what is the gold standard, Mather?
you’re so harsh to criticize everyone and everything you don’t think is the epitome of soul or whatever weird standard you have. it doesn’t seem like your poetry is very poetic to me. there’s no good or unique imagery. bukowski had that. he had the blunt paragraph like you but then he had some verbal gems to mix it up. your stuff is sort of like a laundry list to me. just because something is a different style than yours doesn’t mean you have to lash out against it so aggressively.
it’s like what matthew mathers said, “but stan why are you so mad?”
Wait, I assumed we are talking about literature overall not just poetry. That’s a much different world than fiction I think.
Wait, I assumed we are talking about literature overall not just poetry. That’s a much different world than fiction I think.
[…] writing. The Internet has also made the word friend interesting. I’ve written on this subject before. I correspond with lots of people. I have many acquaintances and writers/editors with whom I get on […]