October 2nd, 2008 / 12:25 pm
 Uncategorized

Black Clock open to web subs


Black Clock has always been abysmally slow in their return of reading: last week I got a response from them for stuff I’d sent over a year before, and had since retracted, though this was better than the two other times I submitted, in which I received no response at all.

Hopefully that will take a swing for the better now that they’ve switched their submission policy over to include electronic subs via their website, though we’ll see.

Even despite the long slur, Black Clock has long been one of my favorite to look at lit mags, they make beautiful issues that feature really strong language and image based work, plus its edited by the masterful Steve Erickson. Give it a roll of the dice.

Tags: ,

14 Comments

  1. October 2nd, 2008 / 5:02 pm Darby Larson—

      ‘our response time is no less than six months and up to one year’

      Ouch. They have a lengthy masthead too. Are they just sitting on submissions for six months for spite? A year is probably the longest I’ve seen a journal admit to.

  2. October 2nd, 2008 / 1:02 pm Darby Larson—

      ‘our response time is no less than six months and up to one year’

      Ouch. They have a lengthy masthead too. Are they just sitting on submissions for six months for spite? A year is probably the longest I’ve seen a journal admit to.

  3. October 2nd, 2008 / 5:51 pm Blake Butler—

      yeah, its bad. and a year is by no means a constraint i think, more often i dont get any response.

      the letter i got back last week mentioned something about how it had been sent to one address and then got returned to sender, a year after the fact, so they emailed it to me. that made me laugh for some reason.

      i’m not one to bitch about response times that much but hopefully the e-format will stir it up some.

  4. October 2nd, 2008 / 1:51 pm Blake Butler—

      yeah, its bad. and a year is by no means a constraint i think, more often i dont get any response.

      the letter i got back last week mentioned something about how it had been sent to one address and then got returned to sender, a year after the fact, so they emailed it to me. that made me laugh for some reason.

      i’m not one to bitch about response times that much but hopefully the e-format will stir it up some.

  5. October 2nd, 2008 / 5:59 pm Jimmy Chen—

      i always see ‘black cock’ when i see the covers. ha, they should do a thick issue.

  6. October 2nd, 2008 / 1:59 pm Jimmy Chen—

      i always see ‘black cock’ when i see the covers. ha, they should do a thick issue.

  7. October 2nd, 2008 / 6:03 pm Scott Garson—

      yeah I was working in a book store once a while back and–this is true–somebody called up and asked if we had Erickson’s book, Tours of the Black Cock.

  8. October 2nd, 2008 / 2:03 pm Scott Garson—

      yeah I was working in a book store once a while back and–this is true–somebody called up and asked if we had Erickson’s book, Tours of the Black Cock.

  9. October 2nd, 2008 / 6:15 pm Blake Butler—

      who’s up for starting ‘black cock’ literary magazine?

      there’s probably already plain ol black cock magazine

  10. October 2nd, 2008 / 2:15 pm Blake Butler—

      who’s up for starting ‘black cock’ literary magazine?

      there’s probably already plain ol black cock magazine

  11. October 3rd, 2008 / 12:03 am Brandon Hobson—

      It was over a year for my reply from them. A show of hands for Black Cock magazine?

  12. October 2nd, 2008 / 8:03 pm Brandon Hobson—

      It was over a year for my reply from them. A show of hands for Black Cock magazine?

  13. October 3rd, 2008 / 12:17 am Blake Butler—

      black cock is on the burner

      black cock press?

  14. October 2nd, 2008 / 8:17 pm Blake Butler—

      black cock is on the burner

      black cock press?