Mean
Mean Monday: The Barcelona Review (again, half-assed mean, cause I like their stuff!!!)
This Woman Has Her Nose in the Air
I really like the short stories and book reviews that Jill Adams publishes at The Barcelona Review. And so it is with some mixed feelings that I speak of her literary journal on Mean Monday. But then I did some thinking: she doesn’t give a rat’s ass what I think of her! Nor should she! I posted my ass on the internet! So- whooosh, letting the bitterness flow, people. Bitterness is a huge embarrassment, to say the least, but here it goes.
They do not accept simultaneous submissions and that is fine, in my opinion, if your turnover time is in the three month range. The last submission I sent them (and yes, I did not send it to anyone else), was there for ONE YEAR. I then withdrew it.
Also, I feel they publish an unnecessarily generous amount of “reprints”. Here are three of the many: a Benjamin Percy story from the Paris Review (oh, thanks Jill! I would have never read the Paris Review myself!), Douglas Coupland and Irvine Welsh.
Here is a lovely line from her submission policy: “Work previously published in any form – online or print – or submitted simultaneously to other reviews will not be considered.” Now, I am confused. But you publish reprints??!! Anywhoo, I DO like the work you choose! I like the translation stuff (although I am not sure how you choose what to translate, but that doesn’t matter. Translating and sharing English/Spanish is all good.) I like Barcelona! That is where I met my husband! And did you know that Nadal speaks Mallorcan Catalan with his Uncle Tony? All goood. Good, good good. But here is another thing that pissed me off: your “encouraging” rejection letter, which I will quote below:
I’m afraid it didn’t quite hit the mark, but for what it’s worth, our reader offered a comment:
"...And what is this story really about? A girl has a crush on her female
teacher so volunteers to read to a blind girl in the class to impress her.
Nothing new is explored, learned from the interaction; the teacher is
always in the background and then (the protagonist)gets dumped by her boyfriend
and becomes a slut... But honestly, this blind/not blind thing has been mined so often, it really needs to do something new."I’m sorry it didn’t click with our reader, but it should be encouraging that he took time for a comment.
Actually, Jill, these lines are not very encouraging and “it should be encouraging that he took time to comment” is profoundly condescending. And – you have to believe me- it is not the rejection itself that irritates ( I’ve been in this game for nearly 20 years and get all sorts of rejections) but the details, Jill, the details! The fact that you happily admit to not reading the story yourself is just something I don’t relate to! As someone who was an associate editor for a literary journal as well as a managing editor for a small press, I would never, ever respond to a writer and let them know I didn’t read his/her work. What the fuck? It is not that I read everything- that would be preposterous– but I wouldn’t have it in me to write a writer a personal note where I flat out let them know that I hadn’t looked at the story/novel. I would lie! To be kind. Ultimately, it is not just the quality of the work a journal publishes, but whether or not they also exude “soulfulness”. That is my thing. Not everybody’s.
Before posting this, I did this thing I do with my shrink with my husband and asked, “What is the worst thing that could happen by posting this?” He looked at me and said, “She could have you killed.” (He’s funny. I love him.) But really, wounded pride (which is Pride, Hi Lucifer), rage…all sorts of non-Christian bile. For some reason, I’m OK with gluttony and sloth. But pride and wrath? Yuck. Oh well.
Tags: the barcelona review
I love this
I love this
take down the sloths, pr!
regarding the no simultaneous submissions thing, i listened to a talk by an editor the other day and she was saying that she thinks its ridiculous to not accept them. i thought that was refreshing. granted she’s a writer as well so she has the perspective we do, but she also said that she refuses to send her work to journals that don’t take simultaneous subs and i thought that was ballsy. anyway, i agree if your turnaround is like 90 days or less by all means, demand that writers don’t send their work elsewhere during that time. if not, just trust that people will let you know if something gets accepted elsewhere. they’ll probably be excited to let you know. they just got accepted somewhere, for gawd’s sake.
take down the sloths, pr!
regarding the no simultaneous submissions thing, i listened to a talk by an editor the other day and she was saying that she thinks its ridiculous to not accept them. i thought that was refreshing. granted she’s a writer as well so she has the perspective we do, but she also said that she refuses to send her work to journals that don’t take simultaneous subs and i thought that was ballsy. anyway, i agree if your turnaround is like 90 days or less by all means, demand that writers don’t send their work elsewhere during that time. if not, just trust that people will let you know if something gets accepted elsewhere. they’ll probably be excited to let you know. they just got accepted somewhere, for gawd’s sake.
Gian, is that Gian the editor? If so, I just stopped sweating that wierd stress stink that smells different, than say, the sweat of a nice run, because you, an editor I respect, liked this post.
I really think of myself as pro- whatever, no sim subs, hold onto stuff a long ass time, I don’t know – but sometimes I get offended by the way humans behave.
Ryan, Ryan!!!! I like you – most places take sim subs and that is because most editors are writers, or so that is my understanding. I agree with the editor you heard speak, but I occasionally submit to places that don’t take them, if I really like the journal. (I really like the work that Barcelona Review publishes.) But man, the whole “not that I looked at it” –honestly, that was the thing that made me go “what the fuck” the most. I mean, she didn’t look at the story. I find that wierd. Mostly not from a writers perspective, but because I worked in publishing for years and would NEVER have written a note/email/letter like that. And I wrote many. Many every day during the work week for years. I just don’t get everyone. So there be it.
Me, too.
yeah, it was definitely a dick move on her part. i have not read the barcelona review, i agree they have published some great stuff, just a quick perusal will show that, but no amount of greatness outweighs being an ass.
the barcelona review is not going to like me now.
Me, too.
yeah, it was definitely a dick move on her part. i have not read the barcelona review, i agree they have published some great stuff, just a quick perusal will show that, but no amount of greatness outweighs being an ass.
the barcelona review is not going to like me now.
‘s bureaucratic and not without benefit. The responder removing themselves from the reading tier makes it easier to give you the benefit of a no-holds-barred reader-response, because it’s from someone else. If she’d read it and gave her opinion it would probably be much more sugar-coated, ie. less honest.
‘s bureaucratic and not without benefit. The responder removing themselves from the reading tier makes it easier to give you the benefit of a no-holds-barred reader-response, because it’s from someone else. If she’d read it and gave her opinion it would probably be much more sugar-coated, ie. less honest.
also,
pr, pr!!! i like you, too.
also,
pr, pr!!! i like you, too.
Hey, thanks Ken! I like you. Thanks for liking my post.
Ryan! I like you. Here is the problem. Even if you like a journal, at some point, if you deal with them (as people dealt with me, when I was an editor), beyond the work in the journal, you are dealing with a human being. And I get along with some humans, and their way of being in the world, and less so with other humans. Such is life.
i’ve been told that i get along with few human beings. i think some people are just bad at handling certain situations. like rejecting people? when i was pumping gas after getting kicked out of college years ago, my boss didn’t like firing people. i didn’t think it was a big deal and i ended up firing the ass who was stealing cigarettes every other sunday.
but she didn’t read it. what if she had liked it? you are assuming way too much. you are assuming- one – that she would have the same opinion as her reader. Darby, you may be smarter than me and running a great journal, but I worked in publishing for years and nothing mattters more than subjectivity. I also am not looking for feedback at this time in my life. Sorry. My husband read for the Paris Review when he was 21, right out of college, and it was for the beer. He rejected all of our asses. You go ahead and respect every single person at every journal who reads your shit. I don’t.
i’ve been told that i get along with few human beings. i think some people are just bad at handling certain situations. like rejecting people? when i was pumping gas after getting kicked out of college years ago, my boss didn’t like firing people. i didn’t think it was a big deal and i ended up firing the ass who was stealing cigarettes every other sunday.
this seems like deja vu but meaner.
btw pr, i think true meanness is defined by being negative towards someone or something with repercussions to your reality..
that’s when you let your balls hang and say fuck the world i am mean.
not allowing simultaneous submissions is silly and only a leash imposed by a publications for selfish gains. it is in no way beneficial to the writer (to me at least).
this seems like deja vu but meaner.
btw pr, i think true meanness is defined by being negative towards someone or something with repercussions to your reality..
that’s when you let your balls hang and say fuck the world i am mean.
not allowing simultaneous submissions is silly and only a leash imposed by a publications for selfish gains. it is in no way beneficial to the writer (to me at least).
Jereme-
mean is mean is wrath is a sin. it is rage. wrath/rage. repurcusions to reality? My reality is my soul- whenever I do the wrong thing, I suffer.I do the wrong thing with great regularity.
every journal/publishing house I worked at accepted sim subs. Some don’t. I’m OK with that if the turnaround is reasonable. One year? Not reasonable. But really, I say this again, I would be ashamed to admit I hadn’t read a work I was replying to. I only worked in publishing for 4 years, but still. You meet all types.
I don’t share the ethic that her not reading it is wrong or shameful or something. I see it as just her role, defined by whatever system they’ve created. It’s her role to cull reader responses and not read submissions and just send rejections. I see it as being more human than a form rejection. Her reaction to the story is irrelevant because its not her role to read. You’re getting a subjective response from the reader, just through a third party. It would be like me sending all responses of submissions to my mom and tell her to please send rejections to these people. She’s just a cog. Why does it matter?
I don’t share the ethic that her not reading it is wrong or shameful or something. I see it as just her role, defined by whatever system they’ve created. It’s her role to cull reader responses and not read submissions and just send rejections. I see it as being more human than a form rejection. Her reaction to the story is irrelevant because its not her role to read. You’re getting a subjective response from the reader, just through a third party. It would be like me sending all responses of submissions to my mom and tell her to please send rejections to these people. She’s just a cog. Why does it matter?
You present this well, pr. I especially become aggravated by journals (even sites) that take longer to respond when you send them longer work. Maybe that’s because it takes the editors more time to invest in your work.
There were four stories in my last book that I thought were the strongest of the collection but because they were longer it took forever for places to respond. When my book finally went to the printer, I had to contact these 3 or 4 places and withdraw the pieces (many were waiting for 6 months to over a year).
Night Train was one nice exception.
On the other hand, when submitting shorter work like flash fiction the response is usually fairly quick.
You present this well, pr. I especially become aggravated by journals (even sites) that take longer to respond when you send them longer work. Maybe that’s because it takes the editors more time to invest in your work.
There were four stories in my last book that I thought were the strongest of the collection but because they were longer it took forever for places to respond. When my book finally went to the printer, I had to contact these 3 or 4 places and withdraw the pieces (many were waiting for 6 months to over a year).
Night Train was one nice exception.
On the other hand, when submitting shorter work like flash fiction the response is usually fairly quick.
“Her reaction to the story is irrelevant because its not her role to read.”
Thanks Darby. I don’t think Jill would agree with you. But maybe she would! What I love is your profound self confidence.
She is not a cog, I would think, but I always defer to you, because I am shocked and moved by your knowledge. Perhaps Jill thinks she is a cog? Not sure.
Why’d you turn the reply off?
She must consider her own reading of it irrelevant, otherwise she would have read it. By a cog, I mean only w/r/t to the process, not herself as a person, although it’s subjective enough of a concept that I could say we are all cogs and be honest, since we are all steps in some kind of process, I am a cog in the evolution of mankind, etc.
Anyway, I think what’s got me bothered by all this is that the response you posted I though was an incredibly honest and straight-forward response, both from the reader and the responder. You were offended because she copped to having not read it (which I give her the benefit of the doubt and say, it’s just her job), but that she’s copping to anything at all, is providing you with a not-edited-for-pleasantries response, is what wins her points in my bible.
I think I’ve been kind of pissed off at the world lately so sorry if the eyeballs from this dead horse I am kicking have rolled into your pajama pockets.
Why’d you turn the reply off?
She must consider her own reading of it irrelevant, otherwise she would have read it. By a cog, I mean only w/r/t to the process, not herself as a person, although it’s subjective enough of a concept that I could say we are all cogs and be honest, since we are all steps in some kind of process, I am a cog in the evolution of mankind, etc.
Anyway, I think what’s got me bothered by all this is that the response you posted I though was an incredibly honest and straight-forward response, both from the reader and the responder. You were offended because she copped to having not read it (which I give her the benefit of the doubt and say, it’s just her job), but that she’s copping to anything at all, is providing you with a not-edited-for-pleasantries response, is what wins her points in my bible.
I think I’ve been kind of pissed off at the world lately so sorry if the eyeballs from this dead horse I am kicking have rolled into your pajama pockets.
What a great way of apologizing. Not that you need to. But- thank you. God bless- you may laugh at that- but i mean it. Darby- I know we are not always on the same page. Thanks for looking at my post.
i think the reply thing tiers off at 3 or 4 levels…
i think the reply thing tiers off at 3 or 4 levels…
pr i agree with you on a lot of things except for the statement: i’m not looking for feedback at this time in my life. now that’s ridiculous and has to be called out. seriously? i know pulitzer prize winners, lannan award winners, whiting writers award winners, etc. etc., people who have been writing for over twenty-thirty years and a) they all still have a close-knit group of friends who they rely on as readers, people who will give them honest feedback and b) they still tell me that, until the very moment they sit down and write, they feel like frauds. that they might’ve figured out how to tinker a bit better but still every story is a new story and if they’re really trying to push themselves as artists, new territories are being mined, and so it shouldn’t be as easy as filling out fucking madlibs. you sent to their journal and they gave you feedback, which is rare. to be dismissive of this instance could be understood, but to say that you don’t need feedback at this time in your life? that’s so preposterous i threw up a little bit.
pr i agree with you on a lot of things except for the statement: i’m not looking for feedback at this time in my life. now that’s ridiculous and has to be called out. seriously? i know pulitzer prize winners, lannan award winners, whiting writers award winners, etc. etc., people who have been writing for over twenty-thirty years and a) they all still have a close-knit group of friends who they rely on as readers, people who will give them honest feedback and b) they still tell me that, until the very moment they sit down and write, they feel like frauds. that they might’ve figured out how to tinker a bit better but still every story is a new story and if they’re really trying to push themselves as artists, new territories are being mined, and so it shouldn’t be as easy as filling out fucking madlibs. you sent to their journal and they gave you feedback, which is rare. to be dismissive of this instance could be understood, but to say that you don’t need feedback at this time in your life? that’s so preposterous i threw up a little bit.
gary, pr:
I’m not trying to be douchey but I read “feedback” as “validation” in the original post, which I guess just means that feedback could have been delivered in a way that was a lot more effective, not that it necessarily had to. But it looks to me like the feedback is useful regardless of whether or not you agree with the way it was delivered (kind of in a haphazard, “suck my balls, ima copy and paste” kind of way).
I totally agree on simultaneous submissions, though.
gary, pr:
I’m not trying to be douchey but I read “feedback” as “validation” in the original post, which I guess just means that feedback could have been delivered in a way that was a lot more effective, not that it necessarily had to. But it looks to me like the feedback is useful regardless of whether or not you agree with the way it was delivered (kind of in a haphazard, “suck my balls, ima copy and paste” kind of way).
I totally agree on simultaneous submissions, though.
what is wrong with pr’s statement? I don’t understand.
Why can a person not be confident with their writing? I think a person’s motivation for writing directly correlates with seeking feedback, feeling like a fraud, using a ‘close knit’ group of readers, etc.
maybe pr’s motivation is different than your friends?
‘mine new fields’ and ‘push themselves as artists’ made me throw up my morning carrots.
‘art’ is personal. art is not how to create a word jumble to appeal to a certain demographic. Horny neglected housewives or professors with wool jackets with the power to vote on literary awards are both still a demographic.
don’t fool yourself.
what is wrong with pr’s statement? I don’t understand.
Why can a person not be confident with their writing? I think a person’s motivation for writing directly correlates with seeking feedback, feeling like a fraud, using a ‘close knit’ group of readers, etc.
maybe pr’s motivation is different than your friends?
‘mine new fields’ and ‘push themselves as artists’ made me throw up my morning carrots.
‘art’ is personal. art is not how to create a word jumble to appeal to a certain demographic. Horny neglected housewives or professors with wool jackets with the power to vote on literary awards are both still a demographic.
don’t fool yourself.
thanks for responding to that jereme, i would like to but i think it would come out like an insane rant.
thanks for responding to that jereme, i would like to but i think it would come out like an insane rant.
can’t it be personal to both ‘mine new fields’ and ‘push yourself as an artist’? I don’t understand how art being personal has anything to do with “not wanting to do the same old thing”.
that being said, does what you are saying also mean there is no such thing as good or bad art? just what we do or do not like? what’s even worth discussing, in that case? are books just a “vehicle” for “getting into when you want to dive into the world of literary criticism, which is serious and therefore not personal and therefore worthy”? is “what we like and do not like” just an expression of our psychology, and again, completely meaningless?
I mean, I agree that nerdy professors are just a demographic and writing to a demographic makes terrible books, but I think what you are saying is fundamentally different than just taking the story where you want it to go in terms of it being “personal”. I think what you are also saying is that art is also meaningless?
can’t it be personal to both ‘mine new fields’ and ‘push yourself as an artist’? I don’t understand how art being personal has anything to do with “not wanting to do the same old thing”.
that being said, does what you are saying also mean there is no such thing as good or bad art? just what we do or do not like? what’s even worth discussing, in that case? are books just a “vehicle” for “getting into when you want to dive into the world of literary criticism, which is serious and therefore not personal and therefore worthy”? is “what we like and do not like” just an expression of our psychology, and again, completely meaningless?
I mean, I agree that nerdy professors are just a demographic and writing to a demographic makes terrible books, but I think what you are saying is fundamentally different than just taking the story where you want it to go in terms of it being “personal”. I think what you are also saying is that art is also meaningless?
hi andre,
yes and no. it is a matter of motivation i think. striving to be different for the sake of not being part of the pack is contrived.
everything is meaningless and meaningful. my perception is reality. your perception is reality.
i see meaning and beauty in a lizard bathing in the sun,the orange-red beak of a bird of paradise plant or ants marching in line.
you may see meaning in that stupid urinal thing from duchamp.
i create something for myself. it feels good. i am happy with what i have created. i ‘publish’ it or whatever. the art is no longer mine. it is being absorbed into a 1000 different realities. it is all subjective. the only feeling that is true is how i felt when i created the art. am i happy with what I created?
only a human with ego would look at another person’s creation and say ‘no this is wrong’. the person isn’t appreciating the art. the person wants to bend the creation to their own subjective view of art. how arrogant.
so if pr is happy with what she has created, then quite frankly fuck getting feedback.
the feedback is meaningless.
p.s. the terms just made me throw up a litle. i have nothing against being different for the right reasons.
hi andre,
yes and no. it is a matter of motivation i think. striving to be different for the sake of not being part of the pack is contrived.
everything is meaningless and meaningful. my perception is reality. your perception is reality.
i see meaning and beauty in a lizard bathing in the sun,the orange-red beak of a bird of paradise plant or ants marching in line.
you may see meaning in that stupid urinal thing from duchamp.
i create something for myself. it feels good. i am happy with what i have created. i ‘publish’ it or whatever. the art is no longer mine. it is being absorbed into a 1000 different realities. it is all subjective. the only feeling that is true is how i felt when i created the art. am i happy with what I created?
only a human with ego would look at another person’s creation and say ‘no this is wrong’. the person isn’t appreciating the art. the person wants to bend the creation to their own subjective view of art. how arrogant.
so if pr is happy with what she has created, then quite frankly fuck getting feedback.
the feedback is meaningless.
p.s. the terms just made me throw up a litle. i have nothing against being different for the right reasons.
jereme:
i think everything you just said is dead on. i feel exactly the same way.
i like using douchey as an adjective. it just feels right, i dont know why. there’s something about cleansing a vag that really speaks to me, especially when brought into the english language to secribe a man’s behavior.
i submit everthing simultaneously, even if the guidelines tell me not too. for two reasons, the rejection rates are so, that whats the likelyhood of the barcelone review and the paris review both wanting the same piece at the same time. but also, because a journal has their rules, i have mine. is that douchey? they have the right to rejct me r not consider my work again, ever. thats their perogative. by i’ll cheat til i get caught, then deal with it later.
jereme:
i think everything you just said is dead on. i feel exactly the same way.
i like using douchey as an adjective. it just feels right, i dont know why. there’s something about cleansing a vag that really speaks to me, especially when brought into the english language to secribe a man’s behavior.
i submit everthing simultaneously, even if the guidelines tell me not too. for two reasons, the rejection rates are so, that whats the likelyhood of the barcelone review and the paris review both wanting the same piece at the same time. but also, because a journal has their rules, i have mine. is that douchey? they have the right to rejct me r not consider my work again, ever. thats their perogative. by i’ll cheat til i get caught, then deal with it later.
word barry,
this is where we bump fists and act guarded while secretly wishing we could feel each other’s embrace and a little less alone.
word barry,
this is where we bump fists and act guarded while secretly wishing we could feel each other’s embrace and a little less alone.
seems to me that either the reader at BR found something in the story that pr hadn’t noticed, and now she’s in a position to improve the work, or else the reader at BR was totally off-base and mis-read the thing, in which case pr has learned something about the way in which BR as an institution (mis)reads literature. That’s an important thing to know about a journal: what they favor, what they can’t handle, the kind of mistakes they’re prone to making, what gets them hot.
I think one thing that nobody has really touched on in these comments is that whenever you interact with a literary journal, whether the experience is positive or negative or neutral, you are always getting (and importantly, also giving) tons of information about that particular journal’s protocols, abilities, limits, and in a grander sens: its personality. The same way your cover letter tells the journal a little something about you, their submissions guidelines, rejection letter, et al. are all sending the following message:
WE ARE A JOURNAL THAT BEHAVES THIS WAY.
Once you have that information, you can take it or leave it- continue to deal with them or not.
I think what’s more important than the fact the story was rejected, or the manner of the rejection, really is the content of the rejection itself. Barcelona Review hired that reader, and they trust her enough to keep her on staff. That person gave pr very specific critiques of the story, and the editor, after reading over the critiques but not the story itself, decided that it seemed like a competent assessment and chose to simply pass the word along.
We have all now learned something important about how the Barcelona Review functions, and pr has specifically also learned something about how they respond to a certain kind of writing.
Knowing all that, now you’re in a position to take any action you want: make the changes the critique calls for because you agree; keep the story as-is because you like it, but send them work you think is more suited for them, knowing what you know now; or decide “fuck these guys and their shit-factory” then never send them anything again.
seems to me that either the reader at BR found something in the story that pr hadn’t noticed, and now she’s in a position to improve the work, or else the reader at BR was totally off-base and mis-read the thing, in which case pr has learned something about the way in which BR as an institution (mis)reads literature. That’s an important thing to know about a journal: what they favor, what they can’t handle, the kind of mistakes they’re prone to making, what gets them hot.
I think one thing that nobody has really touched on in these comments is that whenever you interact with a literary journal, whether the experience is positive or negative or neutral, you are always getting (and importantly, also giving) tons of information about that particular journal’s protocols, abilities, limits, and in a grander sens: its personality. The same way your cover letter tells the journal a little something about you, their submissions guidelines, rejection letter, et al. are all sending the following message:
WE ARE A JOURNAL THAT BEHAVES THIS WAY.
Once you have that information, you can take it or leave it- continue to deal with them or not.
I think what’s more important than the fact the story was rejected, or the manner of the rejection, really is the content of the rejection itself. Barcelona Review hired that reader, and they trust her enough to keep her on staff. That person gave pr very specific critiques of the story, and the editor, after reading over the critiques but not the story itself, decided that it seemed like a competent assessment and chose to simply pass the word along.
We have all now learned something important about how the Barcelona Review functions, and pr has specifically also learned something about how they respond to a certain kind of writing.
Knowing all that, now you’re in a position to take any action you want: make the changes the critique calls for because you agree; keep the story as-is because you like it, but send them work you think is more suited for them, knowing what you know now; or decide “fuck these guys and their shit-factory” then never send them anything again.
Ten years ago, Jill Adams accepted a story (my first!) and worked with me on it through a few revisions and made it internationally accessible in English and Spanish. Without her example (and without the awesomeness of that early internet editorial experience for me), I probably wouldn’t have started Eyeshot. The Barcelona Review was easily one of the best lit sites out there at the time. Their submission guidelines are probably a bit archaic now maybe? But all I can say is that I found my experience with Jill Adams and the Barcelona Review wholly inspiring, and so I’d like to defend her and them and it against nit-picky “mean-ness.”
Ten years ago, Jill Adams accepted a story (my first!) and worked with me on it through a few revisions and made it internationally accessible in English and Spanish. Without her example (and without the awesomeness of that early internet editorial experience for me), I probably wouldn’t have started Eyeshot. The Barcelona Review was easily one of the best lit sites out there at the time. Their submission guidelines are probably a bit archaic now maybe? But all I can say is that I found my experience with Jill Adams and the Barcelona Review wholly inspiring, and so I’d like to defend her and them and it against nit-picky “mean-ness.”
“And what is this story really about?” I’d say, it’s about an editor who has a crush on herself and, having inflated her sense of self with too long a European postal code, volunteers to read strangers’ work only to masturbate during the rejection process, in front of a mirror, to impress herself.
That’s what my reader told me. I’ve never read the BR. Or BM or whatever it’s called.
Cool!
“And what is this story really about?” I’d say, it’s about an editor who has a crush on herself and, having inflated her sense of self with too long a European postal code, volunteers to read strangers’ work only to masturbate during the rejection process, in front of a mirror, to impress herself.
That’s what my reader told me. I’ve never read the BR. Or BM or whatever it’s called.
Cool!
chipped beef
chipped beef
jereme
Yeah I guess so but when you create anything you usually set out to achieve certain things. Maybe you want the world to seem “real”, or maybe you want to evoke “joy”, “mania” or “sadness”, or maybe you just want to build a house or a skateboard. You can by no means control what other people think, and reading is very subjective, but shouldn’t you be interested in what other people have to say about it? I mean, you can write two sentences and say “this is this” but maybe no one else agrees so haven’t you failed to properly transmit the experience or meaning? Isn’t that a “failure” in some sense? I’d want to hear about it personally so I could agree/disagree/argue that the person doesn’t know what the fuck they are talking about.
I don’t understand how it is all personal, that isn’t true because you are submitting it to a journal. You are writing it down and organising it. It’s not like you just squirted electricity out of your head. You are opening a reality up for response and/or to create different realities in other people and maybe you shouldn’t write for that but you shouldn’t get defensive when it’s given to you either!
Anyway, I agree with Justin Taylor.
jereme
Yeah I guess so but when you create anything you usually set out to achieve certain things. Maybe you want the world to seem “real”, or maybe you want to evoke “joy”, “mania” or “sadness”, or maybe you just want to build a house or a skateboard. You can by no means control what other people think, and reading is very subjective, but shouldn’t you be interested in what other people have to say about it? I mean, you can write two sentences and say “this is this” but maybe no one else agrees so haven’t you failed to properly transmit the experience or meaning? Isn’t that a “failure” in some sense? I’d want to hear about it personally so I could agree/disagree/argue that the person doesn’t know what the fuck they are talking about.
I don’t understand how it is all personal, that isn’t true because you are submitting it to a journal. You are writing it down and organising it. It’s not like you just squirted electricity out of your head. You are opening a reality up for response and/or to create different realities in other people and maybe you shouldn’t write for that but you shouldn’t get defensive when it’s given to you either!
Anyway, I agree with Justin Taylor.
jereme, that’s the biggest crock of shit ever. if you just ‘published or whatever’ and your art was solely personal then you wouldn’t ‘publish or whatever’ and you’d sit at home and doodle in your notebooks. and maybe if you got off on having your shit bound and presented in a professional looking manner with nice fonts and shit, you’d self-publish and leave your stack of work next to your bed. but you don’t. you ‘publish or whatever’ so all your bullshit is null and void.
jereme, that’s the biggest crock of shit ever. if you just ‘published or whatever’ and your art was solely personal then you wouldn’t ‘publish or whatever’ and you’d sit at home and doodle in your notebooks. and maybe if you got off on having your shit bound and presented in a professional looking manner with nice fonts and shit, you’d self-publish and leave your stack of work next to your bed. but you don’t. you ‘publish or whatever’ so all your bullshit is null and void.
gary:
jereme doesnt say it is personal and he does it for himself. he says once he writes it and publishes it then its out of his hands. it becomes your reality not his. “the art is no longer mine. it is being absorbed into a 1000 different realities.” what is a croc of shit about that. because you say so? really? people who think thats a croc of shit are usually people who sit around and jerk off while people tell them how great their work is, liek validayion makes them feel good. its tiresome and ridiculous. this is the age old discussion of reader response and who the text belongs to after it leaves the author. i agree with jereme, it belongs to the masses.
gary:
jereme doesnt say it is personal and he does it for himself. he says once he writes it and publishes it then its out of his hands. it becomes your reality not his. “the art is no longer mine. it is being absorbed into a 1000 different realities.” what is a croc of shit about that. because you say so? really? people who think thats a croc of shit are usually people who sit around and jerk off while people tell them how great their work is, liek validayion makes them feel good. its tiresome and ridiculous. this is the age old discussion of reader response and who the text belongs to after it leaves the author. i agree with jereme, it belongs to the masses.
Barry: I sit around and jerk off while people tell me how great my work is. What’s the point of art but sex?
Barry: I sit around and jerk off while people tell me how great my work is. What’s the point of art but sex?
whatever you want it to be i suppose.
what is art?
a piece of writing? a perfectly made sandwich? a good hand job?
whatever you want it to be i suppose.
what is art?
a piece of writing? a perfectly made sandwich? a good hand job?
i suppose you could care what others think when they read your writing.
i think it depends on your motivation for writing. what strangers think doesn’t matter if writing is mere personal expression
reader response would matter if you want to be marketable, a great story teller or a world famous minimalist.
you are not really creating art though. you are creating something perverse to gain ego mass.
every one wants validation i suppose.
eh being defensive is hard not to do, no? it is that ego thing again.
i agree with justin too. i thought what he said was patent and didn’t need explaining.
i suppose you could care what others think when they read your writing.
i think it depends on your motivation for writing. what strangers think doesn’t matter if writing is mere personal expression
reader response would matter if you want to be marketable, a great story teller or a world famous minimalist.
you are not really creating art though. you are creating something perverse to gain ego mass.
every one wants validation i suppose.
eh being defensive is hard not to do, no? it is that ego thing again.
i agree with justin too. i thought what he said was patent and didn’t need explaining.
hey guess what gary. i actually have started doing exactly what you have just described.
so suck on my crock of shit. suck hard gary, suck it hard.
hey guess what gary. i actually have started doing exactly what you have just described.
so suck on my crock of shit. suck hard gary, suck it hard.
yo.
That was necessary information. But it’s different if you are submitting to the Barcelona Review? Isn’t it? Anyway you sound like you are in a good, confident place, so enjoy that.
I am sorry for talking too much on the internet, that happens too much.
yo.
That was necessary information. But it’s different if you are submitting to the Barcelona Review? Isn’t it? Anyway you sound like you are in a good, confident place, so enjoy that.
I am sorry for talking too much on the internet, that happens too much.
How is it different? You are making the BR to be some mythical creature. It has power because you give it power.
How is it different? You are making the BR to be some mythical creature. It has power because you give it power.
jereme
How isn’t it different? I don’t know dick about the barcelona review. This is really the first I’ve heard of it, whatever that says about me. But it’s the same for any journal or magazine: if you submit work your motives are more than “personal” and you should expect to be treated correspondingly.
jereme
How isn’t it different? I don’t know dick about the barcelona review. This is really the first I’ve heard of it, whatever that says about me. But it’s the same for any journal or magazine: if you submit work your motives are more than “personal” and you should expect to be treated correspondingly.
i dunno it is arguable.
sending your shit out to be published is not the same as seeking feedback.
‘i am done with this and want to find a home for it.’
i dunno it is arguable.
sending your shit out to be published is not the same as seeking feedback.
‘i am done with this and want to find a home for it.’
barry: i like you. i bet you make a good sandwich. but a good sandwich isn’t art. it’s artfully made, well-crafted, but shit man, we have to draw the line somewhere, otherwise we can all take a dump and call it a stravinsky, or something russian-sounding. dig?
now let me cornhole you and you can call me art.
barry: i like you. i bet you make a good sandwich. but a good sandwich isn’t art. it’s artfully made, well-crafted, but shit man, we have to draw the line somewhere, otherwise we can all take a dump and call it a stravinsky, or something russian-sounding. dig?
now let me cornhole you and you can call me art.
jereme:
Yeah, it is debatable. I mean, you could say that if you were really “done” with something you’d just throw it in the trash or whatever but I completely get what you are saying.
jereme:
Yeah, it is debatable. I mean, you could say that if you were really “done” with something you’d just throw it in the trash or whatever but I completely get what you are saying.