Uncategorized
Our Submission Need Not Be Guided
Unsaid 4 has been discussed here before and I’m going to discuss it again. The magazine is fairly new to me and after reading all the glowing reviews of the fourth issue, in particular, I was really intrigued but that intrigue was coupled with a dash of skepticism that was short-lived once I began reading. From the very first story, Unsaid had my attention. There is a breathtaking range of writing in this issue and as I read, I would fold the corners of every page that had some really interesting turn of phrase. By the time I reached the end of the massive, 504 pp. issue, more than half of the book’s pages were folded (See Figure 1). I was not familiar with most of the writers in the issue so it was also great to be introduced to new (to me) writers and writing styles. A lot of the content from this issue is online at the Unsaid website and I highly recommend checking the magazine out if you haven’t already.
Figure 1
If you are looking for a place to start, I’d recommend the work of M.T. Fallon, Andy Devine, Alyson Jane, Emily Mahan, Rachel B. Glaser, Carolyn Altman, Michael Kimball, Danielle Blau (Growth is so lush and elegant as to boggle the mind), Joe Wenderoth, Sarah Manguso, and Bianca Galvez.
I could go on and on about the ways in which the writing in this issue really challenged my understanding and appreciation of what makes a story or a poem or how words should be connected to one another or how so much of the writing was beautiful and ugly and smart and difficult and satisfying. I won’t. Instead, I want to talk about how Unsaid 4 has really forced me to reconsider one of the hallmarks of any literary magazine–submission guidelines.
I have long believed in the importance of submission guidelines and appreciating writers who adhere to those guidelines. With limited time, resources and, often, an overwhelming number of submissions, guidelines really help to simplify the editorial process and ensure a consistent standard. There are very good reasons for setting forth best practices for writing length, the number of pieces that can be submitted, the format in which writing should be submitted, and the kind of information you want to know about writers. Guidelines often bring (the semblance?) of order to the chaos of the slush pile.
When you go to the Unsaid website, there are no submission guidelines, only a brief note that says:
For information and all editorial correspondence:
info@unsaidmagazine.com
I’m so conditioned to work within the current publishing system of clearly outlined submission guidelines that this brief message threw me for a curve. No guidelines? Blasphemy!
Having finished Unsaid and taken some time to really reflect on the magazine both as a whole and in the context of each writer’s work, one of the most interesting things Unsaid does is make the strongest possible argument for the abolition of submission guidelines. Here is a magazine without submission guidelines that has a clearly expressed aesthetic. I have to believe that part of the success of this issue is the result of an editor’s openness to giving fair consideration to anything appearing in the Inbox. The more I’ve thought about this lack of guidelines, the more I think it’s one hell of a smart move. Not only does a lack of submission guidelines allow writers a lot of freedom to solely focus on sending their best work, it invites the kind of writers who won’t be baffled by the message, who won’t see that as an obstacle, who will understand exactly what the editor is telling them. I’m a little embarrassed to admit I wanted to send them something but couldn’t figure out how even though the information I need is right there, in plain view. I might be a robot. It’s a risk versus reward undertaking to do away with submission guidelines but clearly, where Unsaid is concerned, the rewards have been many.
Last night, I read a submission that was 5,067 words long and my first reaction was irritation but then I paused and I thought about Unsaid so I read the story with an open mind. It wasn’t right for PANK, but it didn’t kill me to fairly consider a story that in some insignificant way transgressed the guidelines. I’ll be honest—I was not as open to the 16,000 word submission also in the queue.
Perhaps, as others have suggested before, editors are indeed too attached to submission guidelines and not open enough to whatever comes across the transom. And if writers are largely going to ignore guidelines anyway, why work ourselves into a frenzy about the inevitable? What do we value more–great writing or people who follow directions? What does it say about editorial vision if we summarily dismiss work that exceeds mandated word lengths or page formatting requirements? For the most part, submission guidelines are nothing more than administrative strictures that, when you think about it, only really ask writers to demonstrate reading comprehension and an understanding of how to use a word-processing program to insert page numbers and/or double-space a document, etc etc etc.
I cannot say we’re going to eliminate submission guidelines at PANK but I will have a serious conversation with my co-editor so we can think about how, between the two of us, a no-submission guidelines policy would work for our magazine. I can say that Unsaid has been immeasurably eye-opening for me as an editor. It is a magazine that illustrates the power of what can happen when an editor lets go—when an editor submits to their submissions.
David McLendon is an incredible editor, an amazing reader, and Unsaid #4 is one of the best issues of a literary magazine that I have ever read. David’s only aesthetic, in a sense, is originality–and his lack of submission guidelines helps that original work find its way to him. I interviewed him about editing Unsaid a while back; it’s here: http://www.elimae.com/2009/06/RevMcLendon.html
David McLendon is an incredible editor, an amazing reader, and Unsaid #4 is one of the best issues of a literary magazine that I have ever read. David’s only aesthetic, in a sense, is originality–and his lack of submission guidelines helps that original work find its way to him. I interviewed him about editing Unsaid a while back; it’s here: http://www.elimae.com/2009/06/RevMcLendon.html
I think this is all very true. If you get something you don’t want, you can reject it. And you will always get things you don’t want. Why not open ourselves to the things we don’t know we want?
The Collagist has no real guidelines to speak of and they get incredible results out of it too.
I think this is all very true. If you get something you don’t want, you can reject it. And you will always get things you don’t want. Why not open ourselves to the things we don’t know we want?
The Collagist has no real guidelines to speak of and they get incredible results out of it too.
I notice that the novellas I read in literary journals are often the best thing in the literary journal. Few journals publish them, so the ones who do get the pick of the litter, I guess. And for many writers (Josh Weil, Christopher Coake, Jennifer Spiegel, Jane Smiley, Jim Harrison, Tom Franklin, etc.) the novella is their best natural form, but the most difficult to get published, simply (I suppose) because it’s expensive to devote so many pages to a particular novella, and because nobody much wants to have to screen so many pages.
I notice that the novellas I read in literary journals are often the best thing in the literary journal. Few journals publish them, so the ones who do get the pick of the litter, I guess. And for many writers (Josh Weil, Christopher Coake, Jennifer Spiegel, Jane Smiley, Jim Harrison, Tom Franklin, etc.) the novella is their best natural form, but the most difficult to get published, simply (I suppose) because it’s expensive to devote so many pages to a particular novella, and because nobody much wants to have to screen so many pages.
I support deregulation of submission protocol.
I support deregulation of submission protocol.
I love every word of this.
I love every word of this.
Whole-heartedly agree. If we’re to truly support new writers, is it such a leap to imagine that new writers might be working in new formats, uncommon word lengths etc? I know of magazines that feel more like feature sections in newspapers because the precise filling of space has been more the editors concern than publishing good work. If everytime you pick up a copy of a journal the stories are of the same aesthetic (re: ‘please read our journal to see the kind of work we like to publish’) and the same length then who’s excited about the journal but the most delineated and most predictable readership? It seems to me if more journals don’t take Unsaid’s lead audiences will wane and new writing will be poorly represented.
Whole-heartedly agree. If we’re to truly support new writers, is it such a leap to imagine that new writers might be working in new formats, uncommon word lengths etc? I know of magazines that feel more like feature sections in newspapers because the precise filling of space has been more the editors concern than publishing good work. If everytime you pick up a copy of a journal the stories are of the same aesthetic (re: ‘please read our journal to see the kind of work we like to publish’) and the same length then who’s excited about the journal but the most delineated and most predictable readership? It seems to me if more journals don’t take Unsaid’s lead audiences will wane and new writing will be poorly represented.
I wonder sometimes about the novella and how we treat it. In many ways it seems the ideal form.
I wonder sometimes about the novella and how we treat it. In many ways it seems the ideal form.
Someone needs to ask why submission guidelines ARE in place. Maybe a magazine indeed does have a sensibility. There are so many magazines. It’s like a theme issue. Sometimes you do actually want one segment/genre/thing of writing.
It doesn’t hurt fresh writing any. There is an outlet for EVERY story. Too many outlets. There isn’t a good story/poem/hybrid/CNF written that won’t find a publisher.
I actually like to subscribe to magazines with totally different takes. To get the spectrum in the mail. So I like guidelines.
Someone needs to ask why submission guidelines ARE in place. Maybe a magazine indeed does have a sensibility. There are so many magazines. It’s like a theme issue. Sometimes you do actually want one segment/genre/thing of writing.
It doesn’t hurt fresh writing any. There is an outlet for EVERY story. Too many outlets. There isn’t a good story/poem/hybrid/CNF written that won’t find a publisher.
I actually like to subscribe to magazines with totally different takes. To get the spectrum in the mail. So I like guidelines.
I think establishing a theme or aesthetic is different from guidelines. I don’t want to read the same kind of magazine over and over again but I don’t know that guidelines are what help magazines set themselves apart. I think it’s more about the editing. Still, there’s a lot to be said for guidelines and I’m just thinking through all this stuff and considering different possibilities. I really appreciate your thoughts here, though.
I think establishing a theme or aesthetic is different from guidelines. I don’t want to read the same kind of magazine over and over again but I don’t know that guidelines are what help magazines set themselves apart. I think it’s more about the editing. Still, there’s a lot to be said for guidelines and I’m just thinking through all this stuff and considering different possibilities. I really appreciate your thoughts here, though.
Well, word # guidelines and “No” this genre, etc actually do lead to a sensibility. Then again, why in the hell are writers examining the guidelines? Examine the magazine. Read it. I do get your initial point, but I feel a little baby-out-with-bathwater. PANK has a voice. So maybe an in-between is the answer?
Well, word # guidelines and “No” this genre, etc actually do lead to a sensibility. Then again, why in the hell are writers examining the guidelines? Examine the magazine. Read it. I do get your initial point, but I feel a little baby-out-with-bathwater. PANK has a voice. So maybe an in-between is the answer?
Ultimately yes, I do think an in-between is going to be the answer, at least for PANK because what we having going is not broken so we’re not going to try to fix it. And this is part of the conversation I really want to have–thinking through why we have submission guidelines and the purpose(s) they serve and what we could do to encourage more freedom of expression without drastically changing our aesthetic or our vibe or that thing that sets us apart. You’re so right though when you say examine the magazine. The submissions that really get under my skin aren’t the ones that have ignored the guidelines but rather, they are the ones that clearly demonstrate that the writer has never read a single issue of PANK, freely available online or in print for a reasonable sum.
Ultimately yes, I do think an in-between is going to be the answer, at least for PANK because what we having going is not broken so we’re not going to try to fix it. And this is part of the conversation I really want to have–thinking through why we have submission guidelines and the purpose(s) they serve and what we could do to encourage more freedom of expression without drastically changing our aesthetic or our vibe or that thing that sets us apart. You’re so right though when you say examine the magazine. The submissions that really get under my skin aren’t the ones that have ignored the guidelines but rather, they are the ones that clearly demonstrate that the writer has never read a single issue of PANK, freely available online or in print for a reasonable sum.
I esp. love your last line, Roxane, about submitting to the submissions. A great piece makes you do that anyway. Whatever criteria and preconceptions you brought to it get crushed underneath the sheer steamroller presence of what’s there. I love when that happens–it happens a lot for me when I finally get around to reading a so-called “classic,” where I thought I knew what it was all about, and then it manages to exceed, defy, or totally dance around or between my expectations.
I’m on the other side for the first time, editing for a journal (Camera Obscura), whose first issue just went off to the printer. It’s been a fascinating personal experience because it has forced me to confront the question “What is my aesthetic?” “How does that dovetail or diverge from my fellow editors’ aesthetics?””Do I have an aesthetic?” What’s been most cool for me is seeing the range of stuff that I dug, being reminded of that range. At least, that’s the way it feels from the inside. Maybe someone else is a better judge of one’s aesthetic than oneself. Maybe it’s like the mannerism I didn’t know I had, but that if anyone was imitating me they’d unanimously come up with and be like, “Yeah, that’s totally him.” I just don’t know. But I’m curious. And I’m most glad to have had that “submit to the submissions” type of experience, sometimes latching onto something and other times leaving what I thought were my “tastes” at the door. Sometimes I would like a piece but it just wouldn’t make me submit to it, if that makes sense.
I esp. love your last line, Roxane, about submitting to the submissions. A great piece makes you do that anyway. Whatever criteria and preconceptions you brought to it get crushed underneath the sheer steamroller presence of what’s there. I love when that happens–it happens a lot for me when I finally get around to reading a so-called “classic,” where I thought I knew what it was all about, and then it manages to exceed, defy, or totally dance around or between my expectations.
I’m on the other side for the first time, editing for a journal (Camera Obscura), whose first issue just went off to the printer. It’s been a fascinating personal experience because it has forced me to confront the question “What is my aesthetic?” “How does that dovetail or diverge from my fellow editors’ aesthetics?””Do I have an aesthetic?” What’s been most cool for me is seeing the range of stuff that I dug, being reminded of that range. At least, that’s the way it feels from the inside. Maybe someone else is a better judge of one’s aesthetic than oneself. Maybe it’s like the mannerism I didn’t know I had, but that if anyone was imitating me they’d unanimously come up with and be like, “Yeah, that’s totally him.” I just don’t know. But I’m curious. And I’m most glad to have had that “submit to the submissions” type of experience, sometimes latching onto something and other times leaving what I thought were my “tastes” at the door. Sometimes I would like a piece but it just wouldn’t make me submit to it, if that makes sense.
panks guidelines are for crowd control on limited resources. that’s what seigel says in the comments here… http://www.pankmagazine.com/pankblog/?p=2989 when i tried to make essentially the same argument you are suddenly trying to make with this post.
if you want to make panks guidelines less strict, then you have to somehow make the case that it isn’t going to take more effort for pank editors to handle the extra load of reading submissions in the wrong font. good luck.
panks guidelines are for crowd control on limited resources. that’s what seigel says in the comments here… http://www.pankmagazine.com/pankblog/?p=2989 when i tried to make essentially the same argument you are suddenly trying to make with this post.
if you want to make panks guidelines less strict, then you have to somehow make the case that it isn’t going to take more effort for pank editors to handle the extra load of reading submissions in the wrong font. good luck.
I imagine part of it comes from the [sad?] realization that many writers are unlikely to read the magazine, especially if it costs money, right? Guidelines are a poor substitute, but if you’re tired that no one realizes you haven’t published a single tentacle rape story in five years and you’re not really looking for your first—what else can you do?
I imagine part of it comes from the [sad?] realization that many writers are unlikely to read the magazine, especially if it costs money, right? Guidelines are a poor substitute, but if you’re tired that no one realizes you haven’t published a single tentacle rape story in five years and you’re not really looking for your first—what else can you do?
The only submission guideline that really kills the process for me is the “no genre submissions, please.” Ninety percent of the stuff I’m working on falls into a nebulous “magic realism/fantastical” realm and while it’s not maybe “straight up fantasy,” I usually don’t submit it to those pubs because I don’t know what they consider “genre.”
Oh, and if a magazine requires something weird, like a specific font. I don’t submit to those, either, because, really?
But most sub guidelines are fine. PANK’s, I think, are perfectly reasonable. No sub guidelines is sometimes difficult–you don’t even know if they accept unsolicited subs sometimes.
The only submission guideline that really kills the process for me is the “no genre submissions, please.” Ninety percent of the stuff I’m working on falls into a nebulous “magic realism/fantastical” realm and while it’s not maybe “straight up fantasy,” I usually don’t submit it to those pubs because I don’t know what they consider “genre.”
Oh, and if a magazine requires something weird, like a specific font. I don’t submit to those, either, because, really?
But most sub guidelines are fine. PANK’s, I think, are perfectly reasonable. No sub guidelines is sometimes difficult–you don’t even know if they accept unsolicited subs sometimes.
Preach it.
Preach it.
I’m pretty sure magical realism/fabulism/fantastical are fine and considered literary. By “genre,” I guess I would assume that they mean romance, mystery/detective/crime writing, horror.
I’m pretty sure magical realism/fabulism/fantastical are fine and considered literary. By “genre,” I guess I would assume that they mean romance, mystery/detective/crime writing, horror.
I have been doing a series of Q&A’s with David McLendon about this particular issue, doing a post regarding each author that’s published within, getting his thoughts on what it was that attracted the pieces to him, etc. I recently asked him questions about this policy (or lack thereof) and part of his reply was as follows:
“Let me answer your last question first. As far as submission guidelines are concerned, they are not listed because I refuse to make guidelines. I feel that simply stating, “All editorial correspondence: info@unsaidmagazine.com” is enough. The last thing I want is for a writer to cookie-cut his or her pages into what they think I want for Unsaid. If I were to give guidelines or rules or suggestions, I might stifle an otherwise amazing story. When submitting to Unsaid, writers should not attempt to fit their work to what has previously been printed in our pages. I want the “other,” not “another,” and I think most writers interested in submitting to Unsaid understand this.”
The series (still in-progress) can be seen here:
http://emergingwriters.typepad.com/emerging_writers_network/unsaid-four/
(sorry for EWN self-plug, just seemed possibly appropriate).
Also, thanks to Mike Meginnis for the kind words regarding The Collagist – Matt Bell’s doing great things there.
I have been doing a series of Q&A’s with David McLendon about this particular issue, doing a post regarding each author that’s published within, getting his thoughts on what it was that attracted the pieces to him, etc. I recently asked him questions about this policy (or lack thereof) and part of his reply was as follows:
“Let me answer your last question first. As far as submission guidelines are concerned, they are not listed because I refuse to make guidelines. I feel that simply stating, “All editorial correspondence: info@unsaidmagazine.com” is enough. The last thing I want is for a writer to cookie-cut his or her pages into what they think I want for Unsaid. If I were to give guidelines or rules or suggestions, I might stifle an otherwise amazing story. When submitting to Unsaid, writers should not attempt to fit their work to what has previously been printed in our pages. I want the “other,” not “another,” and I think most writers interested in submitting to Unsaid understand this.”
The series (still in-progress) can be seen here:
http://emergingwriters.typepad.com/emerging_writers_network/unsaid-four/
(sorry for EWN self-plug, just seemed possibly appropriate).
Also, thanks to Mike Meginnis for the kind words regarding The Collagist – Matt Bell’s doing great things there.
Do you find most guidelines to be very restrictive? Most guidelines I think are fairly procedural (write “submission” in email, include a bio, 3-5 poems, include SASE, etc.) and not really restrictive except maybe to have a word limit cap. The one thing I do find frustrating is how many journals say “one story at a time” when I often want to send a few shorts instead (and said magazine publishes shorts)
Do you find most guidelines to be very restrictive? Most guidelines I think are fairly procedural (write “submission” in email, include a bio, 3-5 poems, include SASE, etc.) and not really restrictive except maybe to have a word limit cap. The one thing I do find frustrating is how many journals say “one story at a time” when I often want to send a few shorts instead (and said magazine publishes shorts)
It really depends on the magazine. Some magazines have very flexible guidelines while I’ve seen others that ask people to answer quiz questions about the magazine and jump through other such hoops. Until I read Unsaid, I hadn’t given too much thought to guidelines and how they might shape a magazine but it’s certainly on my mind now.
It really depends on the magazine. Some magazines have very flexible guidelines while I’ve seen others that ask people to answer quiz questions about the magazine and jump through other such hoops. Until I read Unsaid, I hadn’t given too much thought to guidelines and how they might shape a magazine but it’s certainly on my mind now.
I think so too. Unsaid and Collagist are my fantasy publications right now.
I think so too. Unsaid and Collagist are my fantasy publications right now.
Dear Darby,
I think the fundamental idea behind this article is precisely that Mme. Gray has been inspired to think of her job as editor in a different way thanks to D. McLendon’s lead. I admire Mme. Gray, and this article, greatly; it is very honest and it looks to the essence of the editorial practice. LEP
Dear Darby,
I think the fundamental idea behind this article is precisely that Mme. Gray has been inspired to think of her job as editor in a different way thanks to D. McLendon’s lead. I admire Mme. Gray, and this article, greatly; it is very honest and it looks to the essence of the editorial practice. LEP
[this is good]
Also: I work in HR and read resumes all day long. And it’s kind of the same thing. We have submission guidelines, which are the job requirements. But sometimes you get a resume that doesn’t quite fit what you thought you were looking for, but you like it so much that you start looking for ways to make that person what you need.
So submission guidelines aren’t a problem, really, and are probably necessary in most cases, as long as the editors are flexible and open to being suprised. Which I imagine most are.
[this is good]
Also: I work in HR and read resumes all day long. And it’s kind of the same thing. We have submission guidelines, which are the job requirements. But sometimes you get a resume that doesn’t quite fit what you thought you were looking for, but you like it so much that you start looking for ways to make that person what you need.
So submission guidelines aren’t a problem, really, and are probably necessary in most cases, as long as the editors are flexible and open to being suprised. Which I imagine most are.
I’m with Lincoln. I find most guidelines to be pretty procedural — we do or don’t take simultaneous submissions, we do or don’t accept multiple submissions, wait this long before sending again, etc. Which seems fine, and also necessary.
The only thing we’re more directive about at Barrelhouse is the nonfiction, because for that, we’re looking for something very specific — essays that have something to do with pop culture. I guess we’re kind of dicks about explaining that on the site — we’re certainly not very Unsaid about it, because we do say what we’re looking for and what we’re not. I can also tell you that, even with that explanation in place, about 85% of the essays we get don’t even fit into the very broad (we include sports and convenience stores and facebook and videogames and pretty much anything that might generously be thought to have anything to do with pop culture) guidelines. So for us, in that one instance, it feels necessary. That said, clearly, given all I’ve already written here about how few people follow that one particular guideline, it’s not really working.
I’m with Lincoln. I find most guidelines to be pretty procedural — we do or don’t take simultaneous submissions, we do or don’t accept multiple submissions, wait this long before sending again, etc. Which seems fine, and also necessary.
The only thing we’re more directive about at Barrelhouse is the nonfiction, because for that, we’re looking for something very specific — essays that have something to do with pop culture. I guess we’re kind of dicks about explaining that on the site — we’re certainly not very Unsaid about it, because we do say what we’re looking for and what we’re not. I can also tell you that, even with that explanation in place, about 85% of the essays we get don’t even fit into the very broad (we include sports and convenience stores and facebook and videogames and pretty much anything that might generously be thought to have anything to do with pop culture) guidelines. So for us, in that one instance, it feels necessary. That said, clearly, given all I’ve already written here about how few people follow that one particular guideline, it’s not really working.
As the publisher for Unsaid, I can say that David’s editorial artistry resides in his love of reading and writing. I think some editors may view reading submissions as a chore, David celebrates the process.
Simply, David’s selfish love of this process is the soul of Unsaid and the writers (certainly the publisher) benefit greatly.
From a physical place, Unsaid will always be differnet sizes and shapes because we never know what lovely gems are en route to our next issue. I can’t wait for #5. Thanks, David.
As the publisher for Unsaid, I can say that David’s editorial artistry resides in his love of reading and writing. I think some editors may view reading submissions as a chore, David celebrates the process.
Simply, David’s selfish love of this process is the soul of Unsaid and the writers (certainly the publisher) benefit greatly.
From a physical place, Unsaid will always be differnet sizes and shapes because we never know what lovely gems are en route to our next issue. I can’t wait for #5. Thanks, David.
Totally agree with you both. So many novels seem overlong, like the writer was forced to make it longer. So many short story collections have novellas and then filler. Both problems because the novella seems so rejected and unmarketable. Some journals, chapbooks, and One Story are practically the only places that publish. Maybe that will change with ebook readers? Buy a novella for 5 bucks or something?
Totally agree with you both. So many novels seem overlong, like the writer was forced to make it longer. So many short story collections have novellas and then filler. Both problems because the novella seems so rejected and unmarketable. Some journals, chapbooks, and One Story are practically the only places that publish. Maybe that will change with ebook readers? Buy a novella for 5 bucks or something?
Those magazines must be few and far between though. I’ve submitted to most of the big literary magazines and the ones that get talked about here and always read the guidelines. The only things I ever notice that aren’t just procedural are a word limit to stories sometimes, maybe no novel excerpts (though that’s rare), and often a no genre fiction type requirement which is clearly intended just to keep hard sci-fi and high fantasy type stuff out.
At least on the fiction side of things.
Those magazines must be few and far between though. I’ve submitted to most of the big literary magazines and the ones that get talked about here and always read the guidelines. The only things I ever notice that aren’t just procedural are a word limit to stories sometimes, maybe no novel excerpts (though that’s rare), and often a no genre fiction type requirement which is clearly intended just to keep hard sci-fi and high fantasy type stuff out.
At least on the fiction side of things.
Excuse me, of course i meant “Gay,” not “Gray.”
Excuse me, of course i meant “Gay,” not “Gray.”
i’m late on this (as always), but–
the problem with the word ‘genre’ is that it’s definition is incredibly subjective. I assume there’s still a great percentage of editors/critics/construction workers that use the term “literary” to mask the fact that they aggressively favor psychological realism. I understand Amber’s sentiment because really, who’s to know who’s thinking what?
i’m late on this (as always), but–
the problem with the word ‘genre’ is that it’s definition is incredibly subjective. I assume there’s still a great percentage of editors/critics/construction workers that use the term “literary” to mask the fact that they aggressively favor psychological realism. I understand Amber’s sentiment because really, who’s to know who’s thinking what?
I love that Unsaid doesn’t have submission guidelines. With that said, I can’t imagine how an editor of a lit mag goes through so many submissions as it is. Removing the filter is a scary thought. But I agree with Roxane when she says writers ignore the guidelines anyway so why not open it up. Perhaps it’s worth a one month experiment on PANK. You can always go back to normal if it becomes too insane.
I love that Unsaid doesn’t have submission guidelines. With that said, I can’t imagine how an editor of a lit mag goes through so many submissions as it is. Removing the filter is a scary thought. But I agree with Roxane when she says writers ignore the guidelines anyway so why not open it up. Perhaps it’s worth a one month experiment on PANK. You can always go back to normal if it becomes too insane.
I think this is an especially interesting post, Roxane, because the way I met you was your detailed rejection of a dialect story of mine that you felt wasn’t to PANK’s aesthetic. And it wasn’t. I own up to it– I hadn’t read PANK, though I have now. And I hadn’t read Unsaid, either, when I submitted the same story and had it accepted there, though having read Unsaid 4 now, I completely agree with you– wow. Yet I think you could make the argument that Unsaid’s aesthetic really is Mr. McLendon’s judgement, which is entirely open to experimentation and the unconventional and does not prescribe subject in any way… it would seem he is concerned only with something being achieved, that he privileges significance and a willingness to risk over any other concern. I love that openness, but it is as if his sensibility is itself an aesthetic that requires a lack of prescription or limitation from the outset.
I think this is an especially interesting post, Roxane, because the way I met you was your detailed rejection of a dialect story of mine that you felt wasn’t to PANK’s aesthetic. And it wasn’t. I own up to it– I hadn’t read PANK, though I have now. And I hadn’t read Unsaid, either, when I submitted the same story and had it accepted there, though having read Unsaid 4 now, I completely agree with you– wow. Yet I think you could make the argument that Unsaid’s aesthetic really is Mr. McLendon’s judgement, which is entirely open to experimentation and the unconventional and does not prescribe subject in any way… it would seem he is concerned only with something being achieved, that he privileges significance and a willingness to risk over any other concern. I love that openness, but it is as if his sensibility is itself an aesthetic that requires a lack of prescription or limitation from the outset.
M, stories get accepted all the time at magazines where writers don’t take the time to read an issue or two. I don’t dispute that, but at PANK, more often than not, the work we love the most reflects an understanding of what we publish or how we’re interested in having our aesthetic challenged. I get the sense that you’re still frustrated about the rejection and I understand given our previous discussions but I would say our sensibility is not prescribed. Sometimes, a story doesn’t click for us, for any number of reasons. The dialect was only one reason and I look forward, I hope, to more from you in the future. Glad to hear you enjoyed Unsaid 4. It really is excellent.
M, stories get accepted all the time at magazines where writers don’t take the time to read an issue or two. I don’t dispute that, but at PANK, more often than not, the work we love the most reflects an understanding of what we publish or how we’re interested in having our aesthetic challenged. I get the sense that you’re still frustrated about the rejection and I understand given our previous discussions but I would say our sensibility is not prescribed. Sometimes, a story doesn’t click for us, for any number of reasons. The dialect was only one reason and I look forward, I hope, to more from you in the future. Glad to hear you enjoyed Unsaid 4. It really is excellent.
No, no, no bitterness or animosity of any kind, R. I think I didn’t take enough care with my tone. PANK’s aesthetic is particular, and particularly experimental and untraditional. I am not particularly experimental or unconventional– I don’t mean that as a criticism of my work, anymore than I mean it as a criticism of PANK. I was telling M. Bell, who just rejected a creative nonfiction piece of mine, that I thought the piece was too sentimental for The Collagist given the most recent issue, and while he didn’t entirely like that idea, I do think it was true of the piece, and of the aesthetic of the TC. Hence the failure to be a good fit.
As to this question of submission guidelines, I do still think that what Mclendon does is very particular, even idiosyncratic to his editorial judgement and sensibility. I don’t believe that means everyone should throw out guidelines– not at all. But it is an interesting issue– how can anyone actually articulate what they’re looking for (as you say, reading an issue is the only way to really understand).
No, no, no bitterness or animosity of any kind, R. I think I didn’t take enough care with my tone. PANK’s aesthetic is particular, and particularly experimental and untraditional. I am not particularly experimental or unconventional– I don’t mean that as a criticism of my work, anymore than I mean it as a criticism of PANK. I was telling M. Bell, who just rejected a creative nonfiction piece of mine, that I thought the piece was too sentimental for The Collagist given the most recent issue, and while he didn’t entirely like that idea, I do think it was true of the piece, and of the aesthetic of the TC. Hence the failure to be a good fit.
As to this question of submission guidelines, I do still think that what Mclendon does is very particular, even idiosyncratic to his editorial judgement and sensibility. I don’t believe that means everyone should throw out guidelines– not at all. But it is an interesting issue– how can anyone actually articulate what they’re looking for (as you say, reading an issue is the only way to really understand).
[…] (read Roxane’s entire article at HMTLGIANT) […]
I’m about to cite this post for the umpteenth time–God, it’s so good. Thanks again, Roxane, even a year later.
[…] decision to do away with most of our initial submission guidelines happened about a year ago, after Roxane Gay posted this lovely piece on HTMLGiant. It really had us thinking about what type of work we limiting ourselves to. We enjoy reading […]