Behind the Scenes
Publication is Not Necessarily a Privilege but it Certainly Is Not a Right
There is a lot of advice out in the world about what it takes to be a good writer but two rarely discussed qualities are maturity and patience.
In my twenties, I was convinced of my genius as a writer and when my work wasn’t being accepted by literary magazines, I was quite certain editors didn’t understand my writing or my project and I subsequently assured myself that the literary world was full of pretension, and held no promise for me. I was severely misunderstood.
I do not know how much of that attitude I have abandoned but I would like to think I’ve matured.
As an editor, figuring out how to respond to submissions is a difficult thing. Some writers want a personal response while others would prefer a form rejection. Some writers would like to know what didn’t work for us while others are only interested in feedback if it is positive. There is no pleasing everyone. I try to send personal feedback when I can, just to give writers a bit of a leg up the next time they are so inclined as to send their work our way. Most of the time this feedback is well-received but there are instances where a writer rejects our rejection with a strongly worded missive and makes it clear that the only opinion that interests them is one accompanied by an acceptance. Providing personal feedback often leads to interesting exchanges but I must admit I quite enjoy my correspondences with writers, however heated they might get.
Last night, I had one such encounter with a writer with whom I’ve corresponded a few times. He’s a good writer but for various reasons the work he has submitted has not heretofore been right for PANK primarily because it’s more firmly grounded in humor than we are generally looking for. During our exchange, this writer, let’s call him Tom (certainly not his real name), lobbied several arguments made by all “misunderstood” writers.
1. Publishing is all about being an insider or an editor who will publish their editor friends. (I don’t dispute that this is true at times but it certainly is not wholly representative of publishing.)
2. The publishing community is not interested in original work or writing that demonstrates personality.
3. He will never be published.
4. He doesn’t understand a lot of writing that is published, writing that is simply not as good as his.
Tom began the most recent installment of our ongoing conversation by referencing a story recently published in PANK . He did not understand what made that story “good.” His statements about the story in question troubled me.
I wrote:
You’re a good writer and you will be published but the petulant attitude where you feel the need to shit on someone else’s work to make yourself feel better is not cool. I’m a writer too and there’s lots of writing out there in the world that baffles me but I don’t begrudge that writing’s right to exist. It’s not about comparing yourself to other writers. It is about comparing yourself TO YOURSELF. To compare what you write to what Random PANK Writer writes is like comparing oranges and electronics. PANK accepts a fraction of all submissions. In a given month we can receive 500 submissions and we will only accept 10-15 of those. Those are the odds you are facing at PANK. At big magazines, the odds are even more challenging. Your job as a writer is to be one of those 10-15 stories that will grab us in the gut and make us say hot damn that was brilliant. I’ve enjoyed the writing you’ve sent and I look forward to future submissions but I think what you’re missing is how to set aside your arrogance and stop feeling like publication is something to which you are entitled. Like I said, you are talented but man, your attitude kind of sucks. Your work isn’t finding a home so you’re looking outward instead of inward. That’s too bad.
I have never understood the inclination to demean someone else’s work to make oneself feel better. I’ve had my smaller moments where I’ve been frustrated by a rejection and in turn have directed my frustration toward the writing in that publication but I know there’s no purpose to that sort of attitude. There are so many great literary magazines out there and in that there’s room for all kinds of writing. Tom’s argument that the story he criticized wasn’t as good as the stories he had submitted and in that, there was something wrong with the entire publication process, is based on the flawed premise that one has anything to do with the other. He then told me he sent the PANK story and his story to an acquaintance and the acquaintance vastly preferred his story. He wrote, facetiously, that he was ahead, 1-0, as if writing is a competition, a contact sport. Perhaps it is. Alas.
In another message, Tom also discussed how he would never be published and certainly not by PANK. I cannot see into the future so I have know way of knowing these things to be true. I believe Tom’s writing is good enough to find a home–it’s merely a question of Tom researching magazines a bit more thoroughly to have a better sense of where to send his work. Tom’s e-mail was, coincidentally, followed by a note from another writer who has been rejected a few times. This writer simply stated, “I give up.”
In publishing talent is important but so are persistence, patience and perseverance. It took me six long, humbling years to crack a literary market when I started submitting my work. In the interim, I wrote and published genre fiction in a community that was, at the time, more receptive to my style. I read and probably became a better writer and definitely became less delusional about my genius. I tried (only somewhat successfully) to learn patience and to be mature enough to recognize that if my work wasn’t succeeding in the literary world, the problem could not be entirely “their” fault, that perhaps there were elements of my craft I could improve. (Sometimes, though, it really is THEIR FAULT.)
When a writer tells me they give up, or when they fatalistically declare they will never be published, I begin to understand how little people know about how publishing often works. One of the reasons I started the Q & A feature was to pull back that editorial curtain. The weird mystery within which the publication process is often veiled does writers far more harm than good. That said, while I cannot claim to have all the answers I do know that if you’re not willing to persist in the face of rejection, the writing life is probably not the best option for you.
My exchange with Tom and the e-mail from the writer who decided to just “give up” really got me to thinking about entitlement. Growing up, my father (like many fathers, I’m sure) was fond of reminding my brothers and I that life isn’t fair when we were pouting about one trivial thing or another. I often want to dispense that advice to writers who feel like publication is inevitable, that publication is their right by the grace of their talent. I’m afraid such is not the case.
Have you considered giving some of these self-righteous people a list of names of journals that are very uncompetitive?
Great article.
Have you considered giving some of these self-righteous people a list of names of journals that are very uncompetitive?
Great article.
Now that I’ve started to be published places and my friends and family are beginning to know that, I have a lot of people say things like, “Oh, yeah, I have some stuff I’ve written–where do I send it to?” Or, “Where do you send your stuff to? I’d like to put some of my stuff that I’ve written online.” It drives me nuts, because the implication is that a)they would certainly be published if they sent something in, b) that it was super easy for me, like all I had to do was send a couple stories to a couple of places, and -voila!- instant publication, and c)online or unpaid publication is easy and undemanding and not to be taken seriously.
I have to explain to these people that like you, Roxane, I spent years and years writing and submitting (and also thinking I was a misunderstood genius) before I had a single thing published and I still get rejected all the time like anyone, and that I write and write and write and revise and revise and it’s not a hobby, it takes as much time and energy as my day job and the fact that I do not get paid has nothing to do with anything, and that online publications or unpaid publications are really hard to get into because they have extremely high standards, too.
As an editor, nothing makes me happier than (most) people’s happy, surprised reaction when you accept a piece. I love it most when this reaction comes from well-published, well-known writers. Getting accepted should always be a happy surprise. I think I would stop writing, or at least submitting, if I ever started feeling like it wasn’t one. That’s part of the awesomeness of writing, at least for me.
Now that I’ve started to be published places and my friends and family are beginning to know that, I have a lot of people say things like, “Oh, yeah, I have some stuff I’ve written–where do I send it to?” Or, “Where do you send your stuff to? I’d like to put some of my stuff that I’ve written online.” It drives me nuts, because the implication is that a)they would certainly be published if they sent something in, b) that it was super easy for me, like all I had to do was send a couple stories to a couple of places, and -voila!- instant publication, and c)online or unpaid publication is easy and undemanding and not to be taken seriously.
I have to explain to these people that like you, Roxane, I spent years and years writing and submitting (and also thinking I was a misunderstood genius) before I had a single thing published and I still get rejected all the time like anyone, and that I write and write and write and revise and revise and it’s not a hobby, it takes as much time and energy as my day job and the fact that I do not get paid has nothing to do with anything, and that online publications or unpaid publications are really hard to get into because they have extremely high standards, too.
As an editor, nothing makes me happier than (most) people’s happy, surprised reaction when you accept a piece. I love it most when this reaction comes from well-published, well-known writers. Getting accepted should always be a happy surprise. I think I would stop writing, or at least submitting, if I ever started feeling like it wasn’t one. That’s part of the awesomeness of writing, at least for me.
people think actual ‘writing’ is so easy–they send chain emails, write ‘fun time w/ puppy!’ on facebook walls & make grocery lists every other day, so how hard can it be?
people think actual ‘writing’ is so easy–they send chain emails, write ‘fun time w/ puppy!’ on facebook walls & make grocery lists every other day, so how hard can it be?
why on earth would you be looking forward to future submissions from this malaka?
xoxo
why on earth would you be looking forward to future submissions from this malaka?
xoxo
When I used to work in a bookstore, a probably 17 year old girl and her boyfriend were perusing our entirely over-limited fiction section, when I was struck by the following conversation that made me want to curl up and die:
Girl: You know, I used to think I wanted to be a writer.
Boy: Oh yeah?
Girl: Yeah! I mean, it would just be so easy! I mean, writing’s really easy.
I walked away quickly before I started shouted. But yeah, the public perception of how “easy” it is to be a writer, and how “easy” it is to get published, particularly in online journals, is really ridiculously oblivious. It’s frustrated. Even when I was working with one of my professors as an undergrad on applying to graduate programs, he didn’t think I should include a publication credit until he discovered the book “had an actual ISBN number and everything.”
When I used to work in a bookstore, a probably 17 year old girl and her boyfriend were perusing our entirely over-limited fiction section, when I was struck by the following conversation that made me want to curl up and die:
Girl: You know, I used to think I wanted to be a writer.
Boy: Oh yeah?
Girl: Yeah! I mean, it would just be so easy! I mean, writing’s really easy.
I walked away quickly before I started shouted. But yeah, the public perception of how “easy” it is to be a writer, and how “easy” it is to get published, particularly in online journals, is really ridiculously oblivious. It’s frustrated. Even when I was working with one of my professors as an undergrad on applying to graduate programs, he didn’t think I should include a publication credit until he discovered the book “had an actual ISBN number and everything.”
If you care about your writing then every rejection is going to sting. But the only response that’s ever worked for me is to either look for publications more in-tune with what I’m writing or (most often) go back to the story and try to write it better … or trash it and try something new. Of course, I went through the whole “I’m a misunderstood genius” phase in my 20s, too. Didn’t really work out for me. I know PANK has removed guidelines but maybe one should be: no work by misunderstood geniuses.
If you care about your writing then every rejection is going to sting. But the only response that’s ever worked for me is to either look for publications more in-tune with what I’m writing or (most often) go back to the story and try to write it better … or trash it and try something new. Of course, I went through the whole “I’m a misunderstood genius” phase in my 20s, too. Didn’t really work out for me. I know PANK has removed guidelines but maybe one should be: no work by misunderstood geniuses.
Excellent article.
In retrospect, there might have been something freeing about the pre-“first published story” days. Now there’s always the sneaky thoughts as I’m finishing a story about “where should I send this? If I cut out a couple paragraphs it’ll be short enough for ______…or if I add something here it’ll be long enough for ______.” And then of course it doesn’t hit with anyone because it’s trying to be something it’s not.
But this is all easy to say now. Really, the pre-“first published story” days sucked. Bought a lot of stamps and envelopes only to find them boomeranged back 8 weeks later. God bless submission manager. Saves money.
Excellent article.
In retrospect, there might have been something freeing about the pre-“first published story” days. Now there’s always the sneaky thoughts as I’m finishing a story about “where should I send this? If I cut out a couple paragraphs it’ll be short enough for ______…or if I add something here it’ll be long enough for ______.” And then of course it doesn’t hit with anyone because it’s trying to be something it’s not.
But this is all easy to say now. Really, the pre-“first published story” days sucked. Bought a lot of stamps and envelopes only to find them boomeranged back 8 weeks later. God bless submission manager. Saves money.
Its regretful anyone has to be rude esp to someone who takes the time to comment and settle the baby into the river so gently as you, Roxane.
The maturity comes I think when you are published and the sun doesn’t shine any differently and angels do not carry you off. The world goes on. Then hopefully we come to terms with why it is we want it.
To sound silly, I think coming to terms with writing as a purity of expression foremost, where none of the rest matters in any real way, is almost mandatory to writing something truly worth publishing. Until then you put too much emphasis on how much someone else values your writing.
Its regretful anyone has to be rude esp to someone who takes the time to comment and settle the baby into the river so gently as you, Roxane.
The maturity comes I think when you are published and the sun doesn’t shine any differently and angels do not carry you off. The world goes on. Then hopefully we come to terms with why it is we want it.
To sound silly, I think coming to terms with writing as a purity of expression foremost, where none of the rest matters in any real way, is almost mandatory to writing something truly worth publishing. Until then you put too much emphasis on how much someone else values your writing.
I think what is discouraging to new writers is the lack of communication as to why their story was rejected. There are no clues in a form rejection to be found, so if a writer isn’t lucky enough to have a good set of readers it can be frustrating to figure out where they went wrong.
Bless Pank and Roxanne for actually taking the time to respond personally to so many submissions. It’s appreciated.
I think what is discouraging to new writers is the lack of communication as to why their story was rejected. There are no clues in a form rejection to be found, so if a writer isn’t lucky enough to have a good set of readers it can be frustrating to figure out where they went wrong.
Bless Pank and Roxanne for actually taking the time to respond personally to so many submissions. It’s appreciated.
I agree with most everything you are saying here. But for the sake of argument: Why shouldn’t some people give up?
Not everyone has the talent or drive to be a writer, or to work in any specific field. It isn’t necessarily bad for some people to give up and work at something they are better at and will get more out of.
I agree with most everything you are saying here. But for the sake of argument: Why shouldn’t some people give up?
Not everyone has the talent or drive to be a writer, or to work in any specific field. It isn’t necessarily bad for some people to give up and work at something they are better at and will get more out of.
I don’t understand how people like this “Tom” get through life. No-one gets everything they want all the time. Does he get dates with every girl/guy he asks out? Does he get every job he applies for? Do traffic lights turn green as he approaches?
Dealing with rejection isn’t just a vital part of writing, it’s a vital part of existing. Throwing a tantrum really doesn’t help anyone.
By the way, I think I was rejected 12 or 13 times from elimae before they accepted something. Looking back, there was nothing wrong with the stories I was submitting (they’ve all found homes elsewhere), but they were wildly inappropriate for elimae. I took the time to get a better idea of what they published, and finally it turned out I had something that was a good fit. If I had just done my research properly in the first place, I probably wouldn’t have racked up quite so many rejections. If writers just randomly pick markets from Duotrope and send the same story to all of them, of course they will get rejected.
I don’t understand how people like this “Tom” get through life. No-one gets everything they want all the time. Does he get dates with every girl/guy he asks out? Does he get every job he applies for? Do traffic lights turn green as he approaches?
Dealing with rejection isn’t just a vital part of writing, it’s a vital part of existing. Throwing a tantrum really doesn’t help anyone.
By the way, I think I was rejected 12 or 13 times from elimae before they accepted something. Looking back, there was nothing wrong with the stories I was submitting (they’ve all found homes elsewhere), but they were wildly inappropriate for elimae. I took the time to get a better idea of what they published, and finally it turned out I had something that was a good fit. If I had just done my research properly in the first place, I probably wouldn’t have racked up quite so many rejections. If writers just randomly pick markets from Duotrope and send the same story to all of them, of course they will get rejected.
When people say that writing is easy, it is a sure sign that they don’t actually read. There have been so many times that I have read a book and just been blown away and thought to myself, “there is no way I can ever do that.”
dear livejournal
When people say that writing is easy, it is a sure sign that they don’t actually read. There have been so many times that I have read a book and just been blown away and thought to myself, “there is no way I can ever do that.”
dear livejournal
i disagree. i think that the articlel was p. good (grammar and spelling were good) but that overall i was bored by it c/d?
(ps–cld you send me the list of journals that are uncompetetive im up for tenure in, like, a week and ive only published on the comment section of this webpage)
i disagree. i think that the articlel was p. good (grammar and spelling were good) but that overall i was bored by it c/d?
(ps–cld you send me the list of journals that are uncompetetive im up for tenure in, like, a week and ive only published on the comment section of this webpage)
hmm.. i too have published in a lot of places (magazines) and i aslo get angry at ppl who ask me questions
agreed writing is easy they teach it to kids in kindergarden
hmm.. i too have published in a lot of places (magazines) and i aslo get angry at ppl who ask me questions
agreed writing is easy they teach it to kids in kindergarden
mods: is there a way to edit comments after you submit them? if so, cld you pls send it to majeck mike
mods: is there a way to edit comments after you submit them? if so, cld you pls send it to majeck mike
pank: only accepts work from the simplest simpletons
pank: only accepts work from the simplest simpletons
This is why we don’t have nice things.
this post was p. confusing
This is why we don’t have nice things.
this post was p. confusing
are you trying to tell me you carefully proofread every comment you leave anywhere ever? i type fast and have typos. i don’t understand why this is a problem, it’s not like ‘switched’ word-endings make something incomprehensible.
are you trying to tell me you carefully proofread every comment you leave anywhere ever? i type fast and have typos. i don’t understand why this is a problem, it’s not like ‘switched’ word-endings make something incomprehensible.
why do i find it necessary to respond to trolls augh
oh, right, because i have absolutely nothing else to do when i’m at work
why do i find it necessary to respond to trolls augh
oh, right, because i have absolutely nothing else to do when i’m at work
I am now going to write “fun time with puppy!” on 20 facebook walls.
I am now going to write “fun time with puppy!” on 20 facebook walls.
just reminding myself
just reminding myself
OK, I wrote “fun time with puppy” on 20 facebook walls, done.
OK, I wrote “fun time with puppy” on 20 facebook walls, done.
dont feed the trolls ™
dont feed the trolls ™
i wouldnt tolerate that kind of behavior if i was yr facebook freind
i wouldnt tolerate that kind of behavior if i was yr facebook freind
responses so far:
“Sure, why not!” — Michelle Reale
“hhhmmmm????” — Meg Pokrass
“i didn’t get the decoder ring” — Ryan Bradley
“wha?” — Molly Gaudry
responses so far:
“Sure, why not!” — Michelle Reale
“hhhmmmm????” — Meg Pokrass
“i didn’t get the decoder ring” — Ryan Bradley
“wha?” — Molly Gaudry
Ha! We shall continue to have nice things!
Ha! We shall continue to have nice things!
I haven’t considered that though Duotrope does offer a list of publications with a high acceptance rate that can be useful for beginning writers (http://www.duotrope.com/RTstats.aspx?report=Top50&pubtype=S) but that said, those DT statistics are so out of whack as to be a bit deceiving.
I haven’t considered that though Duotrope does offer a list of publications with a high acceptance rate that can be useful for beginning writers (http://www.duotrope.com/RTstats.aspx?report=Top50&pubtype=S) but that said, those DT statistics are so out of whack as to be a bit deceiving.
This is a lovely article. Some people take the rj way too much as a kick in the neck. One author who used to sub to us all the time gathered enough no slips to tape together an envelope out of them, then used it to mail a whiny poem about us back to our sub box.
It made me wonder why he didn’t try a different market.
But then, my personal solution to the abundance of rjs has always just been to drink more tequila, so that’s probably not too helpful either.
This is a lovely article. Some people take the rj way too much as a kick in the neck. One author who used to sub to us all the time gathered enough no slips to tape together an envelope out of them, then used it to mail a whiny poem about us back to our sub box.
It made me wonder why he didn’t try a different market.
But then, my personal solution to the abundance of rjs has always just been to drink more tequila, so that’s probably not too helpful either.
L, that’s a good question. There is a small part of me that sees certain writing and thinks that the writer who brought forth that work should just throw in the towel but really, who am I to judge whether or not someone should be a writer? They key thing is to recognize the difference between writing and publishing. If a writer believes in themselves and if writing makes them happy, I respect their choice despite my subjective opinion of their work. I just hate to see writers with some level of talent give up simply because they haven’t found success yet, because achieving their goal has proven harder than they may have originally realized. I like strength and stubbornness.
L, that’s a good question. There is a small part of me that sees certain writing and thinks that the writer who brought forth that work should just throw in the towel but really, who am I to judge whether or not someone should be a writer? They key thing is to recognize the difference between writing and publishing. If a writer believes in themselves and if writing makes them happy, I respect their choice despite my subjective opinion of their work. I just hate to see writers with some level of talent give up simply because they haven’t found success yet, because achieving their goal has proven harder than they may have originally realized. I like strength and stubbornness.
nicely put, rg, and the for reals and mature way to go.
still, three cheers for petulance!
though i only say that b/c i am a misunderstood genius.
really. i am.
nicely put, rg, and the for reals and mature way to go.
still, three cheers for petulance!
though i only say that b/c i am a misunderstood genius.
really. i am.
Why doesn’t Tom start their own magazine? They could publish all the “good” stories and poems. Hell, it could be an ALL TOM issue!
Why doesn’t Tom start their own magazine? They could publish all the “good” stories and poems. Hell, it could be an ALL TOM issue!
I actually made this suggestion.
I actually made this suggestion.
Wouldn’t that give a person a false sense of hope, though? Kind of reminds me of some of this “everyone gets a trophy” that people do with kids a lot.
Wouldn’t that give a person a false sense of hope, though? Kind of reminds me of some of this “everyone gets a trophy” that people do with kids a lot.
I don’t think it is for you or I to judge, but I don’t think it is lamentable that people quit writing or any other discipline. People can only do so much in life and you might as well do what you are good at or at least really enjoy. If you are quitting writing over some rejections, something is probably off.
I don’t think it is for you or I to judge, but I don’t think it is lamentable that people quit writing or any other discipline. People can only do so much in life and you might as well do what you are good at or at least really enjoy. If you are quitting writing over some rejections, something is probably off.
1. Publishing is all about being an insider or an editor who will publish their editor friends. (I don’t dispute that this is true at times but it certainly is not wholly representative of publishing.)
This statement is true. 100% true. And it’s never been more true than right now. It would be refreshing if the people in publishing just admitted as much. How well you write is of no importance anymore unless you know whose asshole your tongue has to swab, especially in New York. It’s all about networking and making friends with people you would normally never want to make friends with. That some people in publishing would refute this claim is absurd.
1. Publishing is all about being an insider or an editor who will publish their editor friends. (I don’t dispute that this is true at times but it certainly is not wholly representative of publishing.)
This statement is true. 100% true. And it’s never been more true than right now. It would be refreshing if the people in publishing just admitted as much. How well you write is of no importance anymore unless you know whose asshole your tongue has to swab, especially in New York. It’s all about networking and making friends with people you would normally never want to make friends with. That some people in publishing would refute this claim is absurd.
“How well you write is of no importance anymore unless you know whose asshole your tongue has to swab, especially in New York.”
Do you know this from experience?
Do you still have a bitter taste in your mouth?
“How well you write is of no importance anymore unless you know whose asshole your tongue has to swab, especially in New York.”
Do you know this from experience?
Do you still have a bitter taste in your mouth?
It isn’t 100% true now or ever. Most magazines either publish from the slush or publish big name authors (yes, many big name authors may be friends of the editor, since you meet people and make friends in a world like like literature, but that doesn’t’ mean much). Knowing people helps, probably more at the book level than the magazine level though. Still, only as an addition to having good work.
It isn’t 100% true now or ever. Most magazines either publish from the slush or publish big name authors (yes, many big name authors may be friends of the editor, since you meet people and make friends in a world like like literature, but that doesn’t’ mean much). Knowing people helps, probably more at the book level than the magazine level though. Still, only as an addition to having good work.
dear my editor friends, please submit to abjective.submission@gmail.com. how well you write is of no importance! thanks!
dear my editor friends, please submit to abjective.submission@gmail.com. how well you write is of no importance! thanks!
Cheers for this article, Roxane. I think people need to learn to cultivate thick skins, and not just because of the overwhelming competition their up against. The publishing world is unfair, it is limited, and if a writer reads as quite other to the material generally being published in a specific literary space then it will take a lot of persistence and a lot of failure for an editor to be seduced by the aberrance of the work. I have some consolation through a group of peers whose opinions I hold above any editor. I think some of these writers don’t have the peer group to sustain belief in their work. Because we always wonder. Especially when you know that your work is peculiar or of some difficulty, you need a peer group who will bother to give your work time. If their knee jerk reaction is one of distaste, they’ll still probably read it again, and things might start blossoming. If I was a music producer, I would have chucked Tom Waits and Nick Cave into the garbage. My point is editors don’t have the time to appreciate your work. Exceptional work shouldn’t satisfy after the first reading, and too much work is geared with bells and whistles to slap the editor across the cheek and see their shining light through the blur of slush. And to me this is nepotism’s paradox: those who publish their friends are denying the existence of genuinely new voices, though at the same time are of a privileged access to the work of their friend and consequently are better equipped to judge the value, if they have read them a few times of course. Publishing is not fair at all. But we must persist and find the editors of sensitivity who have the time to give each submission a chance. If you send enough work out you are bound to encounter one of these.
Cheers for this article, Roxane. I think people need to learn to cultivate thick skins, and not just because of the overwhelming competition their up against. The publishing world is unfair, it is limited, and if a writer reads as quite other to the material generally being published in a specific literary space then it will take a lot of persistence and a lot of failure for an editor to be seduced by the aberrance of the work. I have some consolation through a group of peers whose opinions I hold above any editor. I think some of these writers don’t have the peer group to sustain belief in their work. Because we always wonder. Especially when you know that your work is peculiar or of some difficulty, you need a peer group who will bother to give your work time. If their knee jerk reaction is one of distaste, they’ll still probably read it again, and things might start blossoming. If I was a music producer, I would have chucked Tom Waits and Nick Cave into the garbage. My point is editors don’t have the time to appreciate your work. Exceptional work shouldn’t satisfy after the first reading, and too much work is geared with bells and whistles to slap the editor across the cheek and see their shining light through the blur of slush. And to me this is nepotism’s paradox: those who publish their friends are denying the existence of genuinely new voices, though at the same time are of a privileged access to the work of their friend and consequently are better equipped to judge the value, if they have read them a few times of course. Publishing is not fair at all. But we must persist and find the editors of sensitivity who have the time to give each submission a chance. If you send enough work out you are bound to encounter one of these.
‘those who publish their friends are denying the existence of genuinely new voices’
show me any one place that *exclusively* publishes their friends.
also, define *friends*. if i as an editor accept a writer’s work, can’t i at that point call them my friend afterward? and if so, its now impossible to not publish my friends.
this whole argument is silly. publish your friends! publish your not-friends who then become your friends! publish your enemies! publish your mom, she loves you!
‘those who publish their friends are denying the existence of genuinely new voices’
show me any one place that *exclusively* publishes their friends.
also, define *friends*. if i as an editor accept a writer’s work, can’t i at that point call them my friend afterward? and if so, its now impossible to not publish my friends.
this whole argument is silly. publish your friends! publish your not-friends who then become your friends! publish your enemies! publish your mom, she loves you!
i say we take Tom out back, strip him down, string him up by the ankles, and tickle his feet until the whole world laughs.
not a lot of wiggle room, or any, for opposing viewpoints on this message board, it seems. poor Corey made a daring attempt at thoughtfulness and advocacy. hope he learned his lesson, or she.
i say we take Tom out back, strip him down, string him up by the ankles, and tickle his feet until the whole world laughs.
not a lot of wiggle room, or any, for opposing viewpoints on this message board, it seems. poor Corey made a daring attempt at thoughtfulness and advocacy. hope he learned his lesson, or she.
NYC publishing ass oddly tastes like fried lobster, so no, the taste is not bitter.
NYC publishing ass oddly tastes like fried lobster, so no, the taste is not bitter.
i can’t wait to butter up some agents then!
on that one point i dont agree with corey, but i actually side more with what you are saying. i thought roxane’s note to tom was out of line given i haven’t seen any of tom’s verbage for context. an editor should never point out to a writer their supposed arrogance or in any way psychoanalyze them. Rejected writers sometimes need to go somewhere with their disappointment so its expected they will lash out once in a while, and irrationally. understandable. editor’s best moves are usually not to respond.
i can’t wait to butter up some agents then!
on that one point i dont agree with corey, but i actually side more with what you are saying. i thought roxane’s note to tom was out of line given i haven’t seen any of tom’s verbage for context. an editor should never point out to a writer their supposed arrogance or in any way psychoanalyze them. Rejected writers sometimes need to go somewhere with their disappointment so its expected they will lash out once in a while, and irrationally. understandable. editor’s best moves are usually not to respond.
fried lobster is great! Esp. with eggs.
fried lobster is great! Esp. with eggs.
When I first started being published, I didn’t know a single writer or editor. And THAT is the 100% truth. Now I know some writers through working with them or reaching out to them or them reaching out to me, but I didn’t know a single one until late last year.
When I first started being published, I didn’t know a single writer or editor. And THAT is the 100% truth. Now I know some writers through working with them or reaching out to them or them reaching out to me, but I didn’t know a single one until late last year.
I think you are correct that there is a chance that editors will read their friends work more closely. They still won’t publish it if it isn’t good enough, but it is probably more likely to skip the slush pile and that is an advantage. Still, publishing friends is still I think pretty rare. It is much more likely that you will publish an acquaintance who perhaps you ask to submit.
Magazine editors don’t spend their time and money to promote their best friend’s shitty work. They do it to publish the kind of writing they love and to make a product they can believe in.
My guess is that often when someone publishes a friend it is actually more of a favor on the friends part. The magazine might not have enough good work for the issue and so ask some good writers they know personally to help them fill it out.
I’m not sure what you mean by “Exceptional work shouldn’t satisfy after the first reading, and too much work is geared with bells and whistles to slap the editor across the cheek and see their shining light through the blur of slush. ”
Most work only gets one reading. Most people don’t reread a novel or a story after finishing it, or only rarely. Why shouldn’t exceptional work in the slush pile satisfy on one reading?
I think you are correct that there is a chance that editors will read their friends work more closely. They still won’t publish it if it isn’t good enough, but it is probably more likely to skip the slush pile and that is an advantage. Still, publishing friends is still I think pretty rare. It is much more likely that you will publish an acquaintance who perhaps you ask to submit.
Magazine editors don’t spend their time and money to promote their best friend’s shitty work. They do it to publish the kind of writing they love and to make a product they can believe in.
My guess is that often when someone publishes a friend it is actually more of a favor on the friends part. The magazine might not have enough good work for the issue and so ask some good writers they know personally to help them fill it out.
I’m not sure what you mean by “Exceptional work shouldn’t satisfy after the first reading, and too much work is geared with bells and whistles to slap the editor across the cheek and see their shining light through the blur of slush. ”
Most work only gets one reading. Most people don’t reread a novel or a story after finishing it, or only rarely. Why shouldn’t exceptional work in the slush pile satisfy on one reading?
Alexander,
You’re wrong. The online lit world is actually small. You will bump into people. Same with nursing or advertising or movies. Yawn.
AND
Knowing people is one step. A small step. If you send the people you know shitty work, they reject it. I know a ton of editors. They reject my work all the time. Yawn.
The “It’s who you know” people kill me.
It’s what you write, dumbass.
Period.
People don’t edit magazines to publish shitty friend poems.
It’s always what you write, period.
Everyone who reads and writes here knows that.
Just write something solid. Then revise, revise. Then find a good mag for your groove. Then send.
That’s how you get published.
Alexander,
You’re wrong. The online lit world is actually small. You will bump into people. Same with nursing or advertising or movies. Yawn.
AND
Knowing people is one step. A small step. If you send the people you know shitty work, they reject it. I know a ton of editors. They reject my work all the time. Yawn.
The “It’s who you know” people kill me.
It’s what you write, dumbass.
Period.
People don’t edit magazines to publish shitty friend poems.
It’s always what you write, period.
Everyone who reads and writes here knows that.
Just write something solid. Then revise, revise. Then find a good mag for your groove. Then send.
That’s how you get published.
actually, that might not have been what you were saying, but thats what i am. okay.
actually, that might not have been what you were saying, but thats what i am. okay.
“When I first started being published, I didn’t know a single writer or editor. And THAT is the 100% truth. Now I know some writers through working with them or reaching out to them or them reaching out to me, but I didn’t know a single one until late last year.”
What she said.
Writers, quit the whine (though I approve of the wine)
No one cares!!! hello.
If you want to be published, write something solid.
period.
(now I’m getting heated up, a little ginned.)
“When I first started being published, I didn’t know a single writer or editor. And THAT is the 100% truth. Now I know some writers through working with them or reaching out to them or them reaching out to me, but I didn’t know a single one until late last year.”
What she said.
Writers, quit the whine (though I approve of the wine)
No one cares!!! hello.
If you want to be published, write something solid.
period.
(now I’m getting heated up, a little ginned.)
i was vaguely amusing myself with the first post. but in light of that reply, i need to point out something.
i am roxane’s “Tom,” [my real name is actually tommy]. anyway, and sincerely, roxane was kind enough to engage me in a somewhat extensive e-mail conversation last night. she obviously did not have to. and she deserves credit.
a bit misunderstood, perhaps, i kind of hope. but that is to be expected between strangers via impersonal communication who disagree about something. that’s quite a perfect, toneless vacuum for coming across as too aggressive or too defensive.
whatever the case, i didn’t feel roxane was out of line. and i plan on debating her and submitting to her for as long as she sees fit to respond. what better way to learn?
i was vaguely amusing myself with the first post. but in light of that reply, i need to point out something.
i am roxane’s “Tom,” [my real name is actually tommy]. anyway, and sincerely, roxane was kind enough to engage me in a somewhat extensive e-mail conversation last night. she obviously did not have to. and she deserves credit.
a bit misunderstood, perhaps, i kind of hope. but that is to be expected between strangers via impersonal communication who disagree about something. that’s quite a perfect, toneless vacuum for coming across as too aggressive or too defensive.
whatever the case, i didn’t feel roxane was out of line. and i plan on debating her and submitting to her for as long as she sees fit to respond. what better way to learn?
Hey TOM:
What do you mean “not a lot of wiggle room, or any, for opposing viewpoints on this message board.”
That kills me.
this is a fucking forum.
GO.
BRING IT.
Seriously, bring it.
Hey TOM:
What do you mean “not a lot of wiggle room, or any, for opposing viewpoints on this message board.”
That kills me.
this is a fucking forum.
GO.
BRING IT.
Seriously, bring it.
okie dokie
okie dokie
Darby, I’m not the one making the claim about 100% nepotism. I’m talking generally about nepotism by publications. If you publish the same people (so this takes the position of friends as ‘friends of the publication’) you close the space for a new writer. And notice I spoke about this as both a good and bad thing. It both means more time spent getting to know the work of that writer on the part of the editor, which is better than the ten minutes or less I have heard from editors that they’re able to give a submission (which is again, general, and as I speak of earlier, not a rule given the different submissions loads of every publication), and a lessening of availability for an unknown writer. I’m making a basic point that I’m not sure Roxane would disagree with. I wanted to follow her point and consider further reasons why writers should grow thick skins, persist and persist further, develop readers of their own outside of publications, and send their work to many venues. This said, aim work towards publications that better represent you and don’t send work to nepotistic, closed theme publications if you don’t like them, or if you do send to them for the size of their readership and their reputation expect to have your chances of success diminished many times over. But, I think the most important point Roxane makes is that no writer should consider their publication success or failure as any indicator of their abilities. And as I explained earlier, exceptional work by nature will prove difficult to find placement if you have editors thinking thematically and generally about their publication’s face in the world. A new work by nature will prove aberrant. What’s frightening is that just to get published people will ‘gloss’ their work to try to better its success, turn up the volume, brighten the colours, throw in catchy, memorable lines. The literature I privilege is work that develops its own readership, that requires a reader’s transformation of sorts to be taken with it. I would prefer to advocate this work and editors’ possible sensitivity to this (vain optimism I know). We need editors with more time and better sensitivities not to what fits a publication, but rather what transforms them as a reader. There are editors who take this position.
Darby, I’m not the one making the claim about 100% nepotism. I’m talking generally about nepotism by publications. If you publish the same people (so this takes the position of friends as ‘friends of the publication’) you close the space for a new writer. And notice I spoke about this as both a good and bad thing. It both means more time spent getting to know the work of that writer on the part of the editor, which is better than the ten minutes or less I have heard from editors that they’re able to give a submission (which is again, general, and as I speak of earlier, not a rule given the different submissions loads of every publication), and a lessening of availability for an unknown writer. I’m making a basic point that I’m not sure Roxane would disagree with. I wanted to follow her point and consider further reasons why writers should grow thick skins, persist and persist further, develop readers of their own outside of publications, and send their work to many venues. This said, aim work towards publications that better represent you and don’t send work to nepotistic, closed theme publications if you don’t like them, or if you do send to them for the size of their readership and their reputation expect to have your chances of success diminished many times over. But, I think the most important point Roxane makes is that no writer should consider their publication success or failure as any indicator of their abilities. And as I explained earlier, exceptional work by nature will prove difficult to find placement if you have editors thinking thematically and generally about their publication’s face in the world. A new work by nature will prove aberrant. What’s frightening is that just to get published people will ‘gloss’ their work to try to better its success, turn up the volume, brighten the colours, throw in catchy, memorable lines. The literature I privilege is work that develops its own readership, that requires a reader’s transformation of sorts to be taken with it. I would prefer to advocate this work and editors’ possible sensitivity to this (vain optimism I know). We need editors with more time and better sensitivities not to what fits a publication, but rather what transforms them as a reader. There are editors who take this position.
wow – people who agree with roxane sure do curse and name call a lot, largely at those people who suggest an alternative viewpoint.
but maybe i’m just a dumb*ass, or distracted by the bitter taste in my mouth, or unaccustomed to posting on f*cking forums.
either way, no one cares, and something something followed by many exclamation points.
sorry, i am a sub par bringer of it, seriously or otherwise.
wow – people who agree with roxane sure do curse and name call a lot, largely at those people who suggest an alternative viewpoint.
but maybe i’m just a dumb*ass, or distracted by the bitter taste in my mouth, or unaccustomed to posting on f*cking forums.
either way, no one cares, and something something followed by many exclamation points.
sorry, i am a sub par bringer of it, seriously or otherwise.
Satisfying those who want forms and those who want feedback at the same time isn’t all that difficult.
Just send the rejection emails with a subject header that includes the word REJECTION. Those who only want a yes or no, will get their no. Those who want feedback can actually open the email and see what feedback there is in the text of the email.
Satisfying those who want forms and those who want feedback at the same time isn’t all that difficult.
Just send the rejection emails with a subject header that includes the word REJECTION. Those who only want a yes or no, will get their no. Those who want feedback can actually open the email and see what feedback there is in the text of the email.
10 minutes per submission?
Wow.
I hope you are very lonely and bored and have no job and no credit card and also alcohol has no affect on your serotonin as well as sexual intercourse and that bothersome eating thing.
Can Real World please enter stage left?
Uh, this Englsh prof meant effect.
People will read an email they get and the real problem with personal rejections is the take time to write and when you are getting hundreds or thousands of submissions, you don’t have time to personally reject them all.
Darby, it’s not a silly point either, even if I was talking in an extreme way about friends of publications. Think about friends of yours who have trouble getting published because they’re unknown. Think about the small amount of journals, in comparison to the ones you might call nepotistic, that are interested more in publishing people they’ve never heard of. I’m not declaring some inherent corruption, I’m saying this is the natural order, and as I said, sometimes productive, cementing known writers’ reputations, more time spent with quality work etc. I’m saying writers mustn’t be discouraged, must simply be aware and advocate themselves, with their peers, the kinds of journals they privilege. A site like Shampoo, I would say, has the right editorial attitude. It publishes known voices, and some of these known voices’ best work I might add, as well as the emerging.
10 minutes per submission?
Wow.
I hope you are very lonely and bored and have no job and no credit card and also alcohol has no affect on your serotonin as well as sexual intercourse and that bothersome eating thing.
Can Real World please enter stage left?
Uh, this Englsh prof meant effect.
People will read an email they get and the real problem with personal rejections is the take time to write and when you are getting hundreds or thousands of submissions, you don’t have time to personally reject them all.
Darby, it’s not a silly point either, even if I was talking in an extreme way about friends of publications. Think about friends of yours who have trouble getting published because they’re unknown. Think about the small amount of journals, in comparison to the ones you might call nepotistic, that are interested more in publishing people they’ve never heard of. I’m not declaring some inherent corruption, I’m saying this is the natural order, and as I said, sometimes productive, cementing known writers’ reputations, more time spent with quality work etc. I’m saying writers mustn’t be discouraged, must simply be aware and advocate themselves, with their peers, the kinds of journals they privilege. A site like Shampoo, I would say, has the right editorial attitude. It publishes known voices, and some of these known voices’ best work I might add, as well as the emerging.
Kirsty, your first 2 graf say everything tom — or anyone — needs to know. perfectly said!
Kirsty, your first 2 graf say everything tom — or anyone — needs to know. perfectly said!
“Think about the small amount of journals, in comparison to the ones you might call nepotistic, that are interested more in publishing people they’ve never heard of.”
You really think most journals are nepotistic? I’d say most journals are either
a) Interested in publishing big names mostly (note: not friends, but established writers)
or
b) are interested in whatever good work they can find.
Most editors LIKE publishing new voices. They take pride in getting new people in the magazine. I can’t think of many magazines i’d really call neapotistic to unknown voices except maybe some zines no one reads.
“Think about the small amount of journals, in comparison to the ones you might call nepotistic, that are interested more in publishing people they’ve never heard of.”
You really think most journals are nepotistic? I’d say most journals are either
a) Interested in publishing big names mostly (note: not friends, but established writers)
or
b) are interested in whatever good work they can find.
Most editors LIKE publishing new voices. They take pride in getting new people in the magazine. I can’t think of many magazines i’d really call neapotistic to unknown voices except maybe some zines no one reads.
Corey (not to steal the post, sorry)
Why should we be concerned about “friends of yours who have trouble getting published”
So?
the key to getting published is to write publishable work, isn’t it?
People who write good work get published.
Can we agree on that?
Do we need to list the amount of writers who wrote very, very well against cultural grains, against censorship, against their own government, against all current trends, who are very much published?
Why?
Oh, they wrote good shit.
Corey (not to steal the post, sorry)
Why should we be concerned about “friends of yours who have trouble getting published”
So?
the key to getting published is to write publishable work, isn’t it?
People who write good work get published.
Can we agree on that?
Do we need to list the amount of writers who wrote very, very well against cultural grains, against censorship, against their own government, against all current trends, who are very much published?
Why?
Oh, they wrote good shit.
editors dont read submissions next to an egg timer. they read everything, new writer or best-friend writer, to the extent it takes to make a decision they feel confident about. new or known writer makes no difference. sometimes certain writers have innate aesthetics that click with the aesthetics of editors, so their work appears there more. that’s not to say anyone else is not getting as much of a chance though. thats a defeatist attitude.
editors dont read submissions next to an egg timer. they read everything, new writer or best-friend writer, to the extent it takes to make a decision they feel confident about. new or known writer makes no difference. sometimes certain writers have innate aesthetics that click with the aesthetics of editors, so their work appears there more. that’s not to say anyone else is not getting as much of a chance though. thats a defeatist attitude.
Sean, I don’t know whether you’re disagreeing on the 10min thing as too long or too short. After hearing such things said on this site by five or more editors (possibly to the effect of less than 10min even) I’m merely taking a general gist from editors who have spoken up. Sorry if this is wrong. Cheers for the rudeness too.
Oh, and I’m so fucking sick of hearing people saying, “hey man, just write good solid work and send it and you’ll get published. Stop whining.” First of all, remember I am herein advocating stopping the whining on the part of writers regarding their own work’s quality mirrored by success or failure, and also declaring the whole literary environment corrupt. That’s bullshit. Toughen up. But, to say what you say about good solid work without paying any attention to the shortcomings of the literary environment is downright ignorant. If you see no problems with it (especially with the journals of reputation) then you’re beyond moronic, or conversely, extremely successful and no longer give a shit.
Publications should be representing the writers, not the other way around. It is a place for writing to exist. When you stop critiquing your field (or advocating what you see as worthwhile) then it is out of your hands. With my comments, I’m trying to share in the sobriety Roxane offers and consider what we might be able to do to promote good work and good publications.
Sean, I don’t know whether you’re disagreeing on the 10min thing as too long or too short. After hearing such things said on this site by five or more editors (possibly to the effect of less than 10min even) I’m merely taking a general gist from editors who have spoken up. Sorry if this is wrong. Cheers for the rudeness too.
Oh, and I’m so fucking sick of hearing people saying, “hey man, just write good solid work and send it and you’ll get published. Stop whining.” First of all, remember I am herein advocating stopping the whining on the part of writers regarding their own work’s quality mirrored by success or failure, and also declaring the whole literary environment corrupt. That’s bullshit. Toughen up. But, to say what you say about good solid work without paying any attention to the shortcomings of the literary environment is downright ignorant. If you see no problems with it (especially with the journals of reputation) then you’re beyond moronic, or conversely, extremely successful and no longer give a shit.
Publications should be representing the writers, not the other way around. It is a place for writing to exist. When you stop critiquing your field (or advocating what you see as worthwhile) then it is out of your hands. With my comments, I’m trying to share in the sobriety Roxane offers and consider what we might be able to do to promote good work and good publications.
Why is no one replying to the posts using the “reply” button? This thread is hard to follow with everyone posting a new post at the bottom…
sarcasm. always effective, and subtle, and the most sophisticated writing technique ever crafted, ever, in the history of the world, any world, ever.
it must be impossible to cultivate a constructive “f*cking forum” when unrestricted people have access to it. i now have a new topic to complain to roxane about.
be well, everyone
Why is no one replying to the posts using the “reply” button? This thread is hard to follow with everyone posting a new post at the bottom…
sarcasm. always effective, and subtle, and the most sophisticated writing technique ever crafted, ever, in the history of the world, any world, ever.
it must be impossible to cultivate a constructive “f*cking forum” when unrestricted people have access to it. i now have a new topic to complain to roxane about.
be well, everyone
Publications have just as much, in fact more, duty to the readers than to the writers, don’t you think?
Publications have just as much, in fact more, duty to the readers than to the writers, don’t you think?
i agree. why are people doing that.
i agree. why are people doing that.
i agree with hmm.
Mr. Hmmm, I’d give your point that many journals are not repotistic, especially online based. I’d give that point. I think the small journal scene is very lively and exciting indeed.
Sean, my gripe is exactly this definition of publishable. In short, my problem would be the emphasis on ‘the work we like to publish’ and ‘please look at your previous issues for what we like to publish’. This is counter-intuitive to the access allowed by publications to new voices, new work, work that startles and might prove surprising in its milieu. How many times have you read the above statements in submissions guidelines? This good work= publishable work is a synonymity that I would like to improve, rather than your idea, Sean, that it is somehow perfectly balanced.
i agree with hmm.
Mr. Hmmm, I’d give your point that many journals are not repotistic, especially online based. I’d give that point. I think the small journal scene is very lively and exciting indeed.
Sean, my gripe is exactly this definition of publishable. In short, my problem would be the emphasis on ‘the work we like to publish’ and ‘please look at your previous issues for what we like to publish’. This is counter-intuitive to the access allowed by publications to new voices, new work, work that startles and might prove surprising in its milieu. How many times have you read the above statements in submissions guidelines? This good work= publishable work is a synonymity that I would like to improve, rather than your idea, Sean, that it is somehow perfectly balanced.
Oh, and Sean, how many writers were poorly published in their time? Is this not something you’d like to improve? That dead writers do better than when they’re living? Surely.
Oh, and Sean, how many writers were poorly published in their time? Is this not something you’d like to improve? That dead writers do better than when they’re living? Surely.
Sorry, I forget to do that.
Sorry, I forget to do that.
Ok, I have to respond here to two people so sorry,
TOM (with the caps letters)
Is curing a big deal for you? OK, this is a no-cursing post. Cursing is used for emphasis, you know, LIKE BIG LETTERS.
My point is this is a forum. Go right ahead. Make your point. Convince us,
OK?
Corey,
I can already feel we could just meet over beers and have this conversation very friendly. But the internet is unfortunately not a bar. I wish.
I do like the word “sobriety” in your post. I’m tipsy, but still I have to say what I say 2night. And own it.
I have no problem critiquing our field.
I have a problem with an easy critique.
“My work is so good but lit mags don’t get me” is my specific problem.
It’s like “I am normal, but people sure are weird.”
I mean come on.
I try as much as possible to promote good work and good publications. That’s the whole point of much of my online existence, so I’m not sure where we even disagree.
Sean
Ok, I have to respond here to two people so sorry,
TOM (with the caps letters)
Is curing a big deal for you? OK, this is a no-cursing post. Cursing is used for emphasis, you know, LIKE BIG LETTERS.
My point is this is a forum. Go right ahead. Make your point. Convince us,
OK?
Corey,
I can already feel we could just meet over beers and have this conversation very friendly. But the internet is unfortunately not a bar. I wish.
I do like the word “sobriety” in your post. I’m tipsy, but still I have to say what I say 2night. And own it.
I have no problem critiquing our field.
I have a problem with an easy critique.
“My work is so good but lit mags don’t get me” is my specific problem.
It’s like “I am normal, but people sure are weird.”
I mean come on.
I try as much as possible to promote good work and good publications. That’s the whole point of much of my online existence, so I’m not sure where we even disagree.
Sean
I think the duty to readers is precisely this access to new voices, to work they’ve never read before. For example, I think the poor readership of the big journals here in Australia that live on government funding is because of a funding clause that requires them to publish 99% Australian writers. This is one example among many. Because small journals die without funding, and we could be helping them out.
I think the duty to readers is precisely this access to new voices, to work they’ve never read before. For example, I think the poor readership of the big journals here in Australia that live on government funding is because of a funding clause that requires them to publish 99% Australian writers. This is one example among many. Because small journals die without funding, and we could be helping them out.
you are always publishing tipsy or drunk (is that you? am I thinking of someone else?). I like it.
sarcasm, always EFFECTIVE. the last bastion of THOUGHT.
you are always publishing tipsy or drunk (is that you? am I thinking of someone else?). I like it.
sarcasm, always EFFECTIVE. the last bastion of THOUGHT.
I’m glad you agree. And yes, writers are as guilty of that declaration, that no one gets them. Trial and error really is the only solution. But what I feel must be said and must be privileged, because it is so often elided, is having peers. They should be your model. Find writers you appreciate. See what they think of your work. Consistently critique each other. Publications should be reflecting what’s happening in the real world of writing, and be good interlocutors, the intermediary between the readership that desires work that astonishes and challenges them and the writers who write the work. This is an ideal and an impossibility. But we must continue to negotiate this, and as writers influence the trends with what we do best, write.
I’m glad you agree. And yes, writers are as guilty of that declaration, that no one gets them. Trial and error really is the only solution. But what I feel must be said and must be privileged, because it is so often elided, is having peers. They should be your model. Find writers you appreciate. See what they think of your work. Consistently critique each other. Publications should be reflecting what’s happening in the real world of writing, and be good interlocutors, the intermediary between the readership that desires work that astonishes and challenges them and the writers who write the work. This is an ideal and an impossibility. But we must continue to negotiate this, and as writers influence the trends with what we do best, write.
oof. i’ll agree with you there. that kind of a funding clause is kind of stupid.
oof. i’ll agree with you there. that kind of a funding clause is kind of stupid.
Jesus Christ I wish it was Mean Week.
I am going to bed.
I am sorta drunk (maybe level 5) and am going to read 3rd bed magazine and pass out in the garage.
oh but I will bring it tomorrow.
all good to all even TTTTOOOOOMMMM.
Jesus Christ I wish it was Mean Week.
I am going to bed.
I am sorta drunk (maybe level 5) and am going to read 3rd bed magazine and pass out in the garage.
oh but I will bring it tomorrow.
all good to all even TTTTOOOOOMMMM.
I think the intense defensiveness some people express about the whole “nepotism” thing is sort of troubling. I never really worry about it myself, because I edit a magazine and I know that I have rejected people I like a lot and even people who have published me, and I assume everyone else is doing the same, and I don’t think anyone should ever worry about any of this stuff if they want to be a writer because it’s not writing to worry, but I don’t know, the defensiveness does sort of raise an eyebrow. Like, I don’t care what my eyebrow is doing up there, but I do note that it’s rising.
I think Roxane is right — it happens sometimes, probably, but not that much, and who cares?
I think the intense defensiveness some people express about the whole “nepotism” thing is sort of troubling. I never really worry about it myself, because I edit a magazine and I know that I have rejected people I like a lot and even people who have published me, and I assume everyone else is doing the same, and I don’t think anyone should ever worry about any of this stuff if they want to be a writer because it’s not writing to worry, but I don’t know, the defensiveness does sort of raise an eyebrow. Like, I don’t care what my eyebrow is doing up there, but I do note that it’s rising.
I think Roxane is right — it happens sometimes, probably, but not that much, and who cares?
Agree. Not everyone will like you. But if you’re good, you’ll get published regardless of who you know (or don’t know). It’s being good enough to the point of getting to know publishers that helps.
Agree. Not everyone will like you. But if you’re good, you’ll get published regardless of who you know (or don’t know). It’s being good enough to the point of getting to know publishers that helps.
Writers? ANGRY? Never!
@rgay I enjoyed this post. I never respond to people angry with rejections (and I hate sending rejection letters, but it is a necessary evil) because I consider it feeding trolls, but by the same token I don’t think I’ve ever replied to a rejection letter with anything but more submissions. It takes thick skin to be on either side of the fence, and infinitely thicker skin when you are on both.
I’m really glad you posted this, Roxane. I was just writing about this at my own blog for a kind of literary journal discussion I’m getting going with some alumni from my MFA program. What’s strange to me is the message I’ve started receiving on the main page on Duotrope. “Congratulations! Your overall acceptance ratio is higher than the average for users who have submitted to the same markets.” My acceptance ratio is 3.66%. That means I’m getting rejected 96.34% of the time, and Duotrope sees that as a victory.
If you are serious about being published in literary journals, you have to be fully aware of how many rejections you’re going to accumulate.
Writers? ANGRY? Never!
@rgay I enjoyed this post. I never respond to people angry with rejections (and I hate sending rejection letters, but it is a necessary evil) because I consider it feeding trolls, but by the same token I don’t think I’ve ever replied to a rejection letter with anything but more submissions. It takes thick skin to be on either side of the fence, and infinitely thicker skin when you are on both.
I’m really glad you posted this, Roxane. I was just writing about this at my own blog for a kind of literary journal discussion I’m getting going with some alumni from my MFA program. What’s strange to me is the message I’ve started receiving on the main page on Duotrope. “Congratulations! Your overall acceptance ratio is higher than the average for users who have submitted to the same markets.” My acceptance ratio is 3.66%. That means I’m getting rejected 96.34% of the time, and Duotrope sees that as a victory.
If you are serious about being published in literary journals, you have to be fully aware of how many rejections you’re going to accumulate.
Agreeing with hmm always seems to be a good option.
Agreeing with hmm always seems to be a good option.
wow totally random
wow totally random
well that was fun we shld do this again sometime
well that was fun we shld do this again sometime
until then though mebbe we cld stop talking about publication and instead talk about dead ppl turning into pencils or something else that isnt boring
until then though mebbe we cld stop talking about publication and instead talk about dead ppl turning into pencils or something else that isnt boring
Sorry kid, but if you are going to make a troll account please make it not completely banal and uninteresting to read.
Sorry kid, but if you are going to make a troll account please make it not completely banal and uninteresting to read.
Corey, in my experience, good writing does find a home. It is simply too reductive to say that it’s all about nepotism. Such is simply not the case. Editors don’t sit around publishing their friends. When I first started getting published I didn’t know anyone. I don’t live in a literary hotbed, I wasn’t yet involved with PANK, etc. This is the case for most writers.
Corey, in my experience, good writing does find a home. It is simply too reductive to say that it’s all about nepotism. Such is simply not the case. Editors don’t sit around publishing their friends. When I first started getting published I didn’t know anyone. I don’t live in a literary hotbed, I wasn’t yet involved with PANK, etc. This is the case for most writers.
Narcissistic Personality Disorder is the how.
Narcissistic Personality Disorder is the how.
Most magazines in the lit “scene” that the people who visit this site run are the product of free time/hard work/masochism. If the editors want to publish a smorgasbord of their friends throwaway napkin poetry, that’s entirely their choice. They will look silly and put out a mediocre product, but once again, that would be their choice. To assume that nepotism is so pervasive as to be 100% exclusive is reality-denial. To assume that nepotism means bad writing would also be reality-denial.
A new voice isn’t necessarily a good voice. Or at least not the kind of voice that sounds nice in the context of a given publication. That simple fact rankles a lot of people, writers and editors alike. Such is life. Either write what you want and hope for the best, or sell-out to what you think people want from you and be good enough to convince them. Or quit. Three choices.
Most magazines in the lit “scene” that the people who visit this site run are the product of free time/hard work/masochism. If the editors want to publish a smorgasbord of their friends throwaway napkin poetry, that’s entirely their choice. They will look silly and put out a mediocre product, but once again, that would be their choice. To assume that nepotism is so pervasive as to be 100% exclusive is reality-denial. To assume that nepotism means bad writing would also be reality-denial.
A new voice isn’t necessarily a good voice. Or at least not the kind of voice that sounds nice in the context of a given publication. That simple fact rankles a lot of people, writers and editors alike. Such is life. Either write what you want and hope for the best, or sell-out to what you think people want from you and be good enough to convince them. Or quit. Three choices.
Good post, Roxane, but I also think “unpublished” writers should be encouraged to submit more widely. Too many writers suffer from nice person’s disease, or sit around thinking about what *might* happen if they send their story to 30 places (or more) and 2 journals accept it on the same day. Who the hell cares? That would be a great problem to have, wouldn’t it? But I’ve met too many writers who actually worry about this sort of scenarios. My work has been publishable for a while, but I didn’t start getting acceptances until I sent to at least 25 places at a time (mind you, I send to competitive markets). Now that I send to a crap ton of places at once, I don’t have time to worry, or care, if one of the forty rejects me. Yawn.
While it’s never a bad idea to submit to places that are a good “fit” for one’s work, the reality is that most journals don’t have some clearly defined aesthetic, esp. journals that publish “literary” fiction; many of the MFA-based journals change staffs every year. And many of the same writers who think the world is conspiring against them are the same ones sending their stories to 2 places at a time, instead of the recommended 20-25 (or more). Also, on the issue of “fit”–often, my work is rejected quickly by the places that I’m convinced are a good “fit,” and accepted by places that I was unsure of, or that I hadn’t even read.
But how would I have know if I hadn’t submitted widely?
Good post, Roxane, but I also think “unpublished” writers should be encouraged to submit more widely. Too many writers suffer from nice person’s disease, or sit around thinking about what *might* happen if they send their story to 30 places (or more) and 2 journals accept it on the same day. Who the hell cares? That would be a great problem to have, wouldn’t it? But I’ve met too many writers who actually worry about this sort of scenarios. My work has been publishable for a while, but I didn’t start getting acceptances until I sent to at least 25 places at a time (mind you, I send to competitive markets). Now that I send to a crap ton of places at once, I don’t have time to worry, or care, if one of the forty rejects me. Yawn.
While it’s never a bad idea to submit to places that are a good “fit” for one’s work, the reality is that most journals don’t have some clearly defined aesthetic, esp. journals that publish “literary” fiction; many of the MFA-based journals change staffs every year. And many of the same writers who think the world is conspiring against them are the same ones sending their stories to 2 places at a time, instead of the recommended 20-25 (or more). Also, on the issue of “fit”–often, my work is rejected quickly by the places that I’m convinced are a good “fit,” and accepted by places that I was unsure of, or that I hadn’t even read.
But how would I have know if I hadn’t submitted widely?
*this sort of scenario
**how would I have known
*this sort of scenario
**how would I have known
I don’t know Michael. I’m not totally sure I want to be in a journal I haven’t even read. I admit, I’m one of the ones who submits to 1 or 2 at a time. I just can’t think of 20-25 journals that I would actually be happy to see my work in. I guess there are a lot of academic journals out there that I could send to or whatever, but like I said, I don’t know if I want to be in them just to be published or whatever. I don’t know, is that naive? I must be naive.
I don’t know Michael. I’m not totally sure I want to be in a journal I haven’t even read. I admit, I’m one of the ones who submits to 1 or 2 at a time. I just can’t think of 20-25 journals that I would actually be happy to see my work in. I guess there are a lot of academic journals out there that I could send to or whatever, but like I said, I don’t know if I want to be in them just to be published or whatever. I don’t know, is that naive? I must be naive.
tim… i would have been honored to have been on that FB list.
tim… i would have been honored to have been on that FB list.
Isn’t the point to be published though, so that your work is read? Good journals are like good books: there’s not enough time to read them all. I often send to 30 at a time, and though I haven’t read all 30, I’m aware of their reputations and know of writers I admire who have been published in them.
Isn’t the point to be published though, so that your work is read? Good journals are like good books: there’s not enough time to read them all. I often send to 30 at a time, and though I haven’t read all 30, I’m aware of their reputations and know of writers I admire who have been published in them.
tell em send me stuff and i’ll publish it. i just need like free coupon for bigmacs or some wild turkey for the flask or some chicken wings.
tell em send me stuff and i’ll publish it. i just need like free coupon for bigmacs or some wild turkey for the flask or some chicken wings.
oh, I misunderstood you. I thought you were suggesting something like rolling through duotrope’s random market feature 30 times and just sending out. I can understand submitting to something based on reputation or writers you like being published in it.
oh, I misunderstood you. I thought you were suggesting something like rolling through duotrope’s random market feature 30 times and just sending out. I can understand submitting to something based on reputation or writers you like being published in it.
Come on, you don’t actually believe it’s this simple, do you? Of course a new voice isn’t necessarily a good voice. We’re all talking about quality work here, right?
Hope for the best. I agree. But we must never forget that as readers and writers we are responsible for a continued literary community of changing audiences, established and emerging writers, established and emerging readers. It is idiotic to pretend that every avenue is out there waiting for ‘its’ kind of work and is paying for it. I think it’s pathetic that our best journals are not paying our writers. People like Kanoko, Salamun and Leggott, looking for new readers and engaging literary venues are publishing in Shampoo and Otoliths for free. Because they want to be amongst it. This is wonderful and frightening.
So, my fundamental point. I think we as writers should stop whining as individuals about not being published. As members of collectives, we should be up in arms about how our poetry and fiction is being represented, how it’s being distributed to new audiences, how many brilliant writers have arduous tasks of getting published. I say that many journals, especially the well funded, have poor statistics regarding new writers. McSweeney’s sometimes manages it (it has been better in the past). They have lots of money (relatively speaking). Why can’t the Harvard Review do it? I say that editors tastes could emphasise writing that surprises instead of emphasising ideals of the ‘well-written’. These are my concerns. Surely they are some of yours too.
Come on, you don’t actually believe it’s this simple, do you? Of course a new voice isn’t necessarily a good voice. We’re all talking about quality work here, right?
Hope for the best. I agree. But we must never forget that as readers and writers we are responsible for a continued literary community of changing audiences, established and emerging writers, established and emerging readers. It is idiotic to pretend that every avenue is out there waiting for ‘its’ kind of work and is paying for it. I think it’s pathetic that our best journals are not paying our writers. People like Kanoko, Salamun and Leggott, looking for new readers and engaging literary venues are publishing in Shampoo and Otoliths for free. Because they want to be amongst it. This is wonderful and frightening.
So, my fundamental point. I think we as writers should stop whining as individuals about not being published. As members of collectives, we should be up in arms about how our poetry and fiction is being represented, how it’s being distributed to new audiences, how many brilliant writers have arduous tasks of getting published. I say that many journals, especially the well funded, have poor statistics regarding new writers. McSweeney’s sometimes manages it (it has been better in the past). They have lots of money (relatively speaking). Why can’t the Harvard Review do it? I say that editors tastes could emphasise writing that surprises instead of emphasising ideals of the ‘well-written’. These are my concerns. Surely they are some of yours too.
Wow. You really closed the book on this discussion. Except not really. Try again. Maybe next time you’ll get it.
Wow. You really closed the book on this discussion. Except not really. Try again. Maybe next time you’ll get it.
No one gives a shit what you have to say. Including the collective. Now that really sucks.
No one gives a shit what you have to say. Including the collective. Now that really sucks.
If you don’t make your money writing then you are not a writer. You are someone who likes to write in your spare time. If all of your time is spare time then you need to get a job.
If you don’t make your money writing then you are not a writer. You are someone who likes to write in your spare time. If all of your time is spare time then you need to get a job.
hey did yall see trollmonitor burn me back there that shit was tight
hey did yall see trollmonitor burn me back there that shit was tight
holy crap
holy crap
i agree w/ tom that this whole conversation is boring an dretarted
i agree w/ tom that this whole conversation is boring an dretarted
cld you name them pls i have a research paper coming up and i was gonna cite you as a source
cld you name them pls i have a research paper coming up and i was gonna cite you as a source
bye tom
bye tom
TOM, Tom, tom.
TOM, Tom, tom.
wow, great post roxane and conversation here
at some point in a writer’s career they will “get it” or they won’t – the people that really want it bad enough will come to an understanding the what gets published is SUBJECTIVE and that every editor has different tastes, every journal or mag or online site is about different writing – go out and FIND your places to publish, do some research, and UNDERSTAND THE ODDS – if a place has a 1% acceptance rate, go for it, but understand that it is 1 out of 100 stories that get in. even a 10% acceptance rate is 1 out of ten – it is HARD – aim for the top, and then hit the next tier, then keep going down until you get an acceptance OR you aren’t happy with the level you’re at and then consider reworking the piece
i’ve had stories rejected 15 times and then get into a 1% acceptance magazine (and got paid) – i’ve had stories get 25 rejections and then get into a place with a 10% acceptance rate (and got paid)
you are not entitled to success, FIGHT FOR IT, motherfuckers, we all want to be in Hobart, Juked, Missouri Review, Paris Review, TNY, Crazyhorse, F&SF, GUD, Clarkesworld, Weird Tales, or whatever your thing is
write what you like to write, and find the correct place to place it – get to know the editors, what they like and dislike, what they publish (READ those magazine) and take your shots
wow, great post roxane and conversation here
at some point in a writer’s career they will “get it” or they won’t – the people that really want it bad enough will come to an understanding the what gets published is SUBJECTIVE and that every editor has different tastes, every journal or mag or online site is about different writing – go out and FIND your places to publish, do some research, and UNDERSTAND THE ODDS – if a place has a 1% acceptance rate, go for it, but understand that it is 1 out of 100 stories that get in. even a 10% acceptance rate is 1 out of ten – it is HARD – aim for the top, and then hit the next tier, then keep going down until you get an acceptance OR you aren’t happy with the level you’re at and then consider reworking the piece
i’ve had stories rejected 15 times and then get into a 1% acceptance magazine (and got paid) – i’ve had stories get 25 rejections and then get into a place with a 10% acceptance rate (and got paid)
you are not entitled to success, FIGHT FOR IT, motherfuckers, we all want to be in Hobart, Juked, Missouri Review, Paris Review, TNY, Crazyhorse, F&SF, GUD, Clarkesworld, Weird Tales, or whatever your thing is
write what you like to write, and find the correct place to place it – get to know the editors, what they like and dislike, what they publish (READ those magazine) and take your shots
what about the people who didn’t get published in their life time? the stuff that only got published because it created sexual scandal? the stuff that only got published because people took it upon themselves to publish it themselves?
what about the people who didn’t get published in their life time? the stuff that only got published because it created sexual scandal? the stuff that only got published because people took it upon themselves to publish it themselves?
i like this comment
i like this comment
I don’t think there are all that many cases of that and most of them have to do with novels, ones that people often thought were good but they didn’t think could sell.
That’s quite different from the literary magazine world that this post was about. Especially in 2010 when there are literally several hundred literary magazines in America. Good writing will indeed find a home somewhere if the writer is persistent.
I don’t think there are all that many cases of that and most of them have to do with novels, ones that people often thought were good but they didn’t think could sell.
That’s quite different from the literary magazine world that this post was about. Especially in 2010 when there are literally several hundred literary magazines in America. Good writing will indeed find a home somewhere if the writer is persistent.
Roxane and other editors,
I have a question: sometimes I get some close calls on rejection letters that say things like “try us again in the future.” Does this mean that I should revise the piece I already sent them, or try with a new piece?
Roxane and other editors,
I have a question: sometimes I get some close calls on rejection letters that say things like “try us again in the future.” Does this mean that I should revise the piece I already sent them, or try with a new piece?
New piece
New piece
What L said. Generally unless an editor specifically asks you to revise and resubmit, they’re only interested in seeing new work from you.
What L said. Generally unless an editor specifically asks you to revise and resubmit, they’re only interested in seeing new work from you.
I had one story that had been a finalist in a national competition rejected by 45 places that was eventually accepted by a journal with a 1% acceptance rate.
Submit widely, people. Do not listen to folks who say that you should read every single magazine you send to, or obsess over “fit.” When you’re going through the slush, this is the best way to approach the market.
Once you build up some contacts, you can become choosier.
I had one story that had been a finalist in a national competition rejected by 45 places that was eventually accepted by a journal with a 1% acceptance rate.
Submit widely, people. Do not listen to folks who say that you should read every single magazine you send to, or obsess over “fit.” When you’re going through the slush, this is the best way to approach the market.
Once you build up some contacts, you can become choosier.
Richard,
My comments about not reading every single magazine you send to weren’t directed at your post. I think it is important to read as many magazines as possible, but that one’s submission list shouldn’t be limited to magazine’s one’s read.
I’ve never read Five Points, but I’m pretty sure I wouldn’t have a problem with them taking one of my stories.
Richard,
My comments about not reading every single magazine you send to weren’t directed at your post. I think it is important to read as many magazines as possible, but that one’s submission list shouldn’t be limited to magazine’s one’s read.
I’ve never read Five Points, but I’m pretty sure I wouldn’t have a problem with them taking one of my stories.
*magazines
*magazines
damn. thanks.
damn. thanks.
I agree with most everything you and Michael are saying. Persistence is really key and you should submit widely. The only things I’d add are that as grim as 1% acceptance ratios seem, it is probably worth nothing that something like 50% of submissions are instantly rejectable because they don’t fit into the magazine at all (sci-fi stories sent to a poetry magazine), lack of basic spelling and grammar or else just obviously bad. Another huge chunk is pretty quickly rejectable. If your work is good and it fits the magazine, you are competing with a fraction of the overall submissions. So, things aren’t as dire as they seem.
I’d also say that while I agree with Michael you should submit widely, I’d still restrict myself to magazines that are good, that you like and that publish people you want to be with. I think some starting writers (such as myself a few years ago) figure that publication anywhere at any cost is good, but I think you might regret that later on.
I agree with most everything you and Michael are saying. Persistence is really key and you should submit widely. The only things I’d add are that as grim as 1% acceptance ratios seem, it is probably worth nothing that something like 50% of submissions are instantly rejectable because they don’t fit into the magazine at all (sci-fi stories sent to a poetry magazine), lack of basic spelling and grammar or else just obviously bad. Another huge chunk is pretty quickly rejectable. If your work is good and it fits the magazine, you are competing with a fraction of the overall submissions. So, things aren’t as dire as they seem.
I’d also say that while I agree with Michael you should submit widely, I’d still restrict myself to magazines that are good, that you like and that publish people you want to be with. I think some starting writers (such as myself a few years ago) figure that publication anywhere at any cost is good, but I think you might regret that later on.
Lincoln,
Thanks for the response.
The problem I have with the “fit” argument is that it’s somewhat limited. I’ve noticed that online markets tend to have a more clearly defined aesthetic than most MFA-based print journals, so the “fit” argument is probably more applicable to PANK than Bayou Magazine.
I’ve read quite a few MFA-based journals, and most of them publish a range of stuff; there’s simply not enough aesthetic distinction for me to avoid sending my work based on any perceived preference. Many online journals are run by friends who share a similar vision; however, many MFA-based journals are run by students from all sorts of backgrounds and walks of life–students with varied tastes–who are basically thrown together for a year, only to be replaced by a new batch of students a few months later.
So, if one is sending to the MFA-based print journals, I think it’s best to assume that his or her work of literary fiction–assuming that it’s well-written and literary–is worth submitting, without much too much consideration of “fit.”
Even many of the MFA-based print journals that clearly publish riskier work, often publish work that’s more traditional.
Lincoln,
Thanks for the response.
The problem I have with the “fit” argument is that it’s somewhat limited. I’ve noticed that online markets tend to have a more clearly defined aesthetic than most MFA-based print journals, so the “fit” argument is probably more applicable to PANK than Bayou Magazine.
I’ve read quite a few MFA-based journals, and most of them publish a range of stuff; there’s simply not enough aesthetic distinction for me to avoid sending my work based on any perceived preference. Many online journals are run by friends who share a similar vision; however, many MFA-based journals are run by students from all sorts of backgrounds and walks of life–students with varied tastes–who are basically thrown together for a year, only to be replaced by a new batch of students a few months later.
So, if one is sending to the MFA-based print journals, I think it’s best to assume that his or her work of literary fiction–assuming that it’s well-written and literary–is worth submitting, without much too much consideration of “fit.”
Even many of the MFA-based print journals that clearly publish riskier work, often publish work that’s more traditional.
I think you are reading me a little too narrowly. Yes, most magazines have a range of aesthetics, which means you are more likely to fit in in those. Or a wider range of your work is acceptable to send them.
What I’m saying is that a good chunk of submissions to big magazines don’t fit at all (sci-fi novel excerpts sent to poetry magazines, experimental oulipo type stories to The Iowa Review, etc.) so your odds are much better than 1/100 if you are are good writer and are sending work that is generally in the parameters of the magazine.
I think you are reading me a little too narrowly. Yes, most magazines have a range of aesthetics, which means you are more likely to fit in in those. Or a wider range of your work is acceptable to send them.
What I’m saying is that a good chunk of submissions to big magazines don’t fit at all (sci-fi novel excerpts sent to poetry magazines, experimental oulipo type stories to The Iowa Review, etc.) so your odds are much better than 1/100 if you are are good writer and are sending work that is generally in the parameters of the magazine.
In other words, I think we agree.
In other words, I think we agree.
I actually do. I don’t think any collective has any real responsibility. To anyone. To anything. Writing in the end is a hobby, a job, a task, a craft, an art. You engage if you want to engage. You don’t if you don’t.
The things that keep people down are statistics and taste. The first is only going to get harder. The second, well, there’s no accounting for. You don’t like the aesthetic of Harvard Review? Then don’t read it. It’s not the responsibility of a publication to choose surprising (or any other attribute) over their personal preference. I might find most literary fiction boring. That reflects mostly as a judgment on me, not what I’m reading.
I actually do. I don’t think any collective has any real responsibility. To anyone. To anything. Writing in the end is a hobby, a job, a task, a craft, an art. You engage if you want to engage. You don’t if you don’t.
The things that keep people down are statistics and taste. The first is only going to get harder. The second, well, there’s no accounting for. You don’t like the aesthetic of Harvard Review? Then don’t read it. It’s not the responsibility of a publication to choose surprising (or any other attribute) over their personal preference. I might find most literary fiction boring. That reflects mostly as a judgment on me, not what I’m reading.
This is what I mean, man. “I might find most literary fiction boring.” This is very true of a Harvard Review, a Glimmertrain. If not boring, then obvious and predictable. Have you read PANK, noo, opium, Shampoo, Otoliths? Are they boring? I would say no. I would say these publications should be what people see as the face of literature happening now. I would like to see government funding geared towards maintaining a literary culture paying for these publications to continue.
This is what I mean, man. “I might find most literary fiction boring.” This is very true of a Harvard Review, a Glimmertrain. If not boring, then obvious and predictable. Have you read PANK, noo, opium, Shampoo, Otoliths? Are they boring? I would say no. I would say these publications should be what people see as the face of literature happening now. I would like to see government funding geared towards maintaining a literary culture paying for these publications to continue.
I managed it.
I managed it.
It is not as hard as you would think.
It is not as hard as you would think.
It means they can tell you have skill and might have something else they are interested in. They’d just get annoyed if you sent back something they had already seen and said no to.
It means they can tell you have skill and might have something else they are interested in. They’d just get annoyed if you sent back something they had already seen and said no to.
schopenhauer says ‘he who criticizes others, works at the reformation of himself’
your post condemns an attitude in tom that you once also found in yourself and hope is now defeated
tom’s email condemned another’s work probably out of a fear that the faults in his own were worse and possibly to guard his work against their future reproduction
same habit, different objects
you say ‘there’s lots of writing out there in the world that baffles me but I don’t begrudge that writing’s right to exist’
then how do you begrudge a behavior ‘[you] have never understood’ the right to exist? what is the distance between one’s behavior and one’s work? is the work so innocuous and innocent and apart from the world as to slip the chains still binding the behavior? is writing a short story a radically different sort of action from writing an email — do we still believe the literary act an abnormality?
i don’t know, when the privilege to censure lays uneven, i get uneasy
schopenhauer says ‘he who criticizes others, works at the reformation of himself’
your post condemns an attitude in tom that you once also found in yourself and hope is now defeated
tom’s email condemned another’s work probably out of a fear that the faults in his own were worse and possibly to guard his work against their future reproduction
same habit, different objects
you say ‘there’s lots of writing out there in the world that baffles me but I don’t begrudge that writing’s right to exist’
then how do you begrudge a behavior ‘[you] have never understood’ the right to exist? what is the distance between one’s behavior and one’s work? is the work so innocuous and innocent and apart from the world as to slip the chains still binding the behavior? is writing a short story a radically different sort of action from writing an email — do we still believe the literary act an abnormality?
i don’t know, when the privilege to censure lays uneven, i get uneasy
What exactly is contentious about the idea of “knowing people”? Social networking is not identical to nepotism. Why implicitly devalue the idea of community? Maybe because it’s a bunch of shit, but what isn’t?
What exactly is contentious about the idea of “knowing people”? Social networking is not identical to nepotism. Why implicitly devalue the idea of community? Maybe because it’s a bunch of shit, but what isn’t?
So a writer is allowed to abuse an editor as much as they want because that’s normal and expected, but the editor is not permitted to respond to this abuse because that would be unprofessional? I believe that we should hold writers up to the same standard of professionalism that we hold editors to. We’re all engaging in the same process.
So a writer is allowed to abuse an editor as much as they want because that’s normal and expected, but the editor is not permitted to respond to this abuse because that would be unprofessional? I believe that we should hold writers up to the same standard of professionalism that we hold editors to. We’re all engaging in the same process.
[…] moping about this latest rejection, I read a great post on HTML Giant. The author, Roxanne Gay, is an editor at Pank magazine, and in that role, she has the pleasure […]
I can certainly understand the writer’s frustrations. Trying to get my work published has proved a Sisyphean task. On the other hand, an experience I’ve always found humbling is re-reading my older writing, seeing how amateurish it was compared to my current writing and remembering how I felt like a misunderstood genius at the time.
I can certainly understand the writer’s frustrations. Trying to get my work published has proved a Sisyphean task. On the other hand, an experience I’ve always found humbling is re-reading my older writing, seeing how amateurish it was compared to my current writing and remembering how I felt like a misunderstood genius at the time.