Uncategorized
Brave souls submit
Severely rigid writer’s guidelines seem only to serve editorial anal-retentive impulses, which I sadly sometimes feel may be driving certain journals to begin with.
I often go to a submissions page and have to tread through 8 or so dense paragraphs of (ironically, often inefficiently written) prose about typing my last name after the word ‘submission’ followed immediately with two forward slashes and then the word count. Are they suggesting that failure to be so explicit will preclude their ability to just read the story? And what is it about including mailing address for online journals? Unless there’s some distant prospect of a printed anthology (at which point many addresses will have changed), the entire medium is exclusively virtual. Do these editors want to see if you live in a culturally viable city like New York? If so, just say so. The street number doesn’t help.
Cover letters are absurd. Writers are not ‘allowed’ to describe their story, thus left in the awkward position of either fawning over the journal, or trying to sell themselves with a list of past publications. This crap is completely useless. Just read the fucking story.
I understand that writers can be disorganized, and these editors are describing an ideal process of what can be a logistical headache, but please, try to be more intuitive and agile here. In the magic of email, the sender’s name is cited along with the email. Is it not possible to simply associate a story as originating from a particular email, one which includes the writer’s name? It just seems that if an editor is serious about publishing a story, he or she will somehow ‘figure it out,’ and if they don’t want to publish a piece, then it’s irrelevant anyways.
Perhaps more irritating is when editors ‘go off’ (usually for three paragraphs) on—not merely what they are looking for in a story, but—the moral ethics of what makes good writing in the most absolute and abstract sense. They say things like, “describe it, don’t say it.” I’ll fucking say it if I want to. I’m the writer here, you’re the editor. It’s my job to write, and your job to reject or accept it. It’s not your job to preach to a voiceless public about how to write.
For every editor, there are about 200 writers. By statistical default, editors have ‘the power.’ They should be nice, and publish what they like, and reject what they don’t. If their egos are still hungry, write them a story about a sandwich. Wait, Bukowski did that already…
Tags: anal stage, editors, ham on rye, submission guidelines
Cover letters should be for getting a real job, not for your fucking story.
Cover letters should be for getting a real job, not for your fucking story.
I’m just happy that so many journals now accept electronic submissions. I do stumble over the cover letter thing, though. Usually I just end up writing a couple of sentences about how evil skunks are and I hope my sentences don’t make them puke. I’m thinking about writing a 20 page cover letter, so it takes longer for them to get to the part where they send me the rejection form.
This was very funny.
I’m just happy that so many journals now accept electronic submissions. I do stumble over the cover letter thing, though. Usually I just end up writing a couple of sentences about how evil skunks are and I hope my sentences don’t make them puke. I’m thinking about writing a 20 page cover letter, so it takes longer for them to get to the part where they send me the rejection form.
This was very funny.
1. cover letters are for jokes.
2. it’s really hard to see the hyperlinks on this blog. ooo burn!
1. cover letters are for jokes.
2. it’s really hard to see the hyperlinks on this blog. ooo burn!
I don’t like it when they give a list of content they don’t want, like ‘no stories with talking animals,’ ‘no goat fucking stories,’ etc. It shows an attitude of, I’ve never read a story with talking animals I liked, therefore I never will. Creativity shouldn’t be restricted, it should be encouraged.
I don’t like it when they give a list of content they don’t want, like ‘no stories with talking animals,’ ‘no goat fucking stories,’ etc. It shows an attitude of, I’ve never read a story with talking animals I liked, therefore I never will. Creativity shouldn’t be restricted, it should be encouraged.
i got burnt
i got burnt
I list stuff that I don’t want in my guidelines. Necessary evil. Most submitters don’t read the journal. They don’t know what I like. I didn’t used to do this. Over time, I noticed trends. I would keep getting stories that dealt with the same subject matter and I would always dislike these stories. So I made it easier on everybody. I may miss out on a good story because of this, and that is unfortunate, but it saves time. Although people usually just ignore the guidelines. Which makes me assume the story will be bad, unless they mention something like, “This story is about a vampire, but….” in the cover letter.
I list stuff that I don’t want in my guidelines. Necessary evil. Most submitters don’t read the journal. They don’t know what I like. I didn’t used to do this. Over time, I noticed trends. I would keep getting stories that dealt with the same subject matter and I would always dislike these stories. So I made it easier on everybody. I may miss out on a good story because of this, and that is unfortunate, but it saves time. Although people usually just ignore the guidelines. Which makes me assume the story will be bad, unless they mention something like, “This story is about a vampire, but….” in the cover letter.
no stories with talking animcals = subtropics
no stories with talking animcals = subtropics