Uncategorized
Tyrant on Tyrant: 3 Sentences
A GUEST TRANSMISSION from the great GIANCARLO DITRAPANO of NEW YORK TYRANT:
Hello, great minds of HTML. Blake has been kind enough to let me put up this post. Thanks, Blake.
Now here’s the post:
The New York Tyrant made a new website and re-opened submissions. We wanted to try something new. The deal is this: We only accept regular mail submissions now, but if you insist on sending electronically, please test the waters with the THREE BEST SENTENCES from your story. If we like it, you will be asked to email the rest of it to us for consideration. If not, back to the drawing board. So the writing/submitting world kind of has a gamble. In all honesty, I wanted to taper off the amount of electronic submissions, but not lose a potentially great story written by a writer that is perhaps too lazy to make it to the post office. Say you have a complete story in hand. Is it fair to reject the story after reading just a couple of sentences? Is it perhaps MORE fair to reject it if ALL you have is three sentences? Could this perhaps benefit the writer, by making them find the best three sentences of their work? Will this make them concentrate more on the sentences they compose, just in case they are planning on submitting to NYTYRANT’s weird new submissions policy? Should I feel bad about the environment because I am accepting only regular mail submissions? Does this perhaps SAVE the trees by rejecting writers electronically and keeping them from printing one out to send in the mail? Am I concentrating too much on “sentences” rather than narrative? Is this stepping away from “short fiction” and stepping towards something…else? Is it possible that many bad sentences can, in concert, make a beautiful story? What, after all, is the big deal with great sentences?
Some examples of what we have received so far. Would you tell the writer to “send more” or ask them to resist? (I have left the authors names off.) (Yes, some aren’t even three sentences. Writers never follow the rules. Bravi, writers!)
Writer A sent this:
It is impossible for you to understand anything else about my disposition unless you can understand just how emotional a thing as simple as drapery can make me; how on days when the sky is filthy with grey clouds I find myself sitting in that very room, anxiously struggling to solve the dilemma of whether I should wait for the light or seek my shelter. I could cry for hours on a day like that, I swear.
Writer B sent this:
Ironically, sunny warm Florida in North America to a cold rainy mountain city in Latin America. There are worse things than rain. Thinking you’ll be alone forever is one of them.
Writer C sent this:
The name of my agency came to me when I saw the movie I Am Legend with a hottie named Stella who kept saying I reminded her of Will Smith, although he’s a whole lot balder, has much bigger ears and a darker complexion. So I had it painted on my office windows facing Cabrini Playground here on Barracks Street in the Lower French Quarter — I Am Adventure. Catchy, right?
Thank you for your thoughts! Sorry for such a long post. Hope it isn’t too boring.
P.S. Two parts: Who is the guy from Rome Review blowing to get an interview with Junot Diaz and pieces from Heti and Means without even having one damn issue out yet?? And B, who do I call to offer the same service, only longer and better and with more slobber?
Tags: junot diaz, nytyrant, Submissions, will smith
i think when a submission clearly demonstrates that the author has no idea of the kind of work the magazine normally publishes, they are fair game for giving the same lack of attention
the three sentence idea seems, to me, a great way to weed out those who just aren’t paying any attention.
i love this idea
i think when a submission clearly demonstrates that the author has no idea of the kind of work the magazine normally publishes, they are fair game for giving the same lack of attention
the three sentence idea seems, to me, a great way to weed out those who just aren’t paying any attention.
i love this idea
I sort of liked the first submission you post here.
Perhaps the three sentences thing will work for you. Your journal is very language driven, so it might work. My problem is with the disjointedness of any random three sentences from the work. If I were running a journal- and finger fucking all sorts of people to get good authors to submit–I would choose one paragraph over three sentences from anywhere. Show me the best graph from your work! Yes, that would work better for me. But you are you, and you’re trying to do something for a reason.
But I like that you are trying to figure out a way to make your job as an editor more..precise? More better? Nice.
I sort of liked the first submission you post here.
Perhaps the three sentences thing will work for you. Your journal is very language driven, so it might work. My problem is with the disjointedness of any random three sentences from the work. If I were running a journal- and finger fucking all sorts of people to get good authors to submit–I would choose one paragraph over three sentences from anywhere. Show me the best graph from your work! Yes, that would work better for me. But you are you, and you’re trying to do something for a reason.
But I like that you are trying to figure out a way to make your job as an editor more..precise? More better? Nice.
I sort of liked the first submission you post here.
Perhaps the three sentences thing will work for you. Your journal is very language driven, so it might work. My problem is with the disjointedness of any random three sentences from the work. If I were running a journal- and finger fucking all sorts of people to get good authors to submit–I would choose one paragraph over three sentences from anywhere. Show me the best graph from your work! Yes, that would work better for me. But you are you, and you’re trying to do something for a reason.
But I like that you are trying to figure out a way to make your job as an editor more..precise? More better? Nice.
I sort of liked the first submission you post here.
Perhaps the three sentences thing will work for you. Your journal is very language driven, so it might work. My problem is with the disjointedness of any random three sentences from the work. If I were running a journal- and finger fucking all sorts of people to get good authors to submit–I would choose one paragraph over three sentences from anywhere. Show me the best graph from your work! Yes, that would work better for me. But you are you, and you’re trying to do something for a reason.
But I like that you are trying to figure out a way to make your job as an editor more..precise? More better? Nice.
i guess the three sentences thing is ok. but id probably take into consideration that a journal should exist for the benefit of the readers and writers, not the editors, and that being the case i would make it as easy as possible for them to submit, including electronically. instead of calling a writer lazy but not wasting paper and postage maybe you should ask yourself what do i have to lose by reading electronic submissions, are there too many of them? isnt that being lazy?
either way. i would ask for the work of all three.
i guess the three sentences thing is ok. but id probably take into consideration that a journal should exist for the benefit of the readers and writers, not the editors, and that being the case i would make it as easy as possible for them to submit, including electronically. instead of calling a writer lazy but not wasting paper and postage maybe you should ask yourself what do i have to lose by reading electronic submissions, are there too many of them? isnt that being lazy?
either way. i would ask for the work of all three.
but was the wrong word. i meant for.
but was the wrong word. i meant for.
i’m not sure i agree with the term that a magazine is there ‘for the benefit’ of the writers
it is for the proliferation of good writing, not ‘a helping hand’
and in that manner, screening seems right
if the author feels uncomfortable by this, they don’t have to do it.
i’m not sure i agree with the term that a magazine is there ‘for the benefit’ of the writers
it is for the proliferation of good writing, not ‘a helping hand’
and in that manner, screening seems right
if the author feels uncomfortable by this, they don’t have to do it.
I did not mean to post twice. sorry. not sure how that happened.
i do like the idea that a journal exists for the readers. I like that idea a lot. Babel said something about worshipping the reader that I used to repeat to myself over and over again years ago. I forget it now.
certainly. what you are saying is what i meant. you are right.
but how is making someone print and waste postage “screening”
screening for what?
what is measured by sending something through u.s. mail?
and for what purpose?
I did not mean to post twice. sorry. not sure how that happened.
i do like the idea that a journal exists for the readers. I like that idea a lot. Babel said something about worshipping the reader that I used to repeat to myself over and over again years ago. I forget it now.
certainly. what you are saying is what i meant. you are right.
but how is making someone print and waste postage “screening”
screening for what?
what is measured by sending something through u.s. mail?
and for what purpose?
they accepts the preview sentences electronically
regular subs can be sent via mail, w/o screening
i think this cuts down on ‘blanket submissions’ where a dude will seem to send a piece to any place that takes e-subs, just because its free and easy. cut and paste.
you cut down on the bullshit factor for slush pile, essentially.
i want to start a journal with such rigid sub policies no one can submit. this i think has been discussed before
they accepts the preview sentences electronically
regular subs can be sent via mail, w/o screening
i think this cuts down on ‘blanket submissions’ where a dude will seem to send a piece to any place that takes e-subs, just because its free and easy. cut and paste.
you cut down on the bullshit factor for slush pile, essentially.
i want to start a journal with such rigid sub policies no one can submit. this i think has been discussed before
fuck, i said ‘slush pile’
i mean: dumbasses
yeah, maybe it cuts down on random submissions, but i wouldnt say it effects the quality of the submission. i read for a print issue of a journal that i know lots of folks read and respect, and we got just as much shitty shitty shit through postal mail as we did through email. i didnt see a correlation between the quality of the writing and the method in which it is submitted.
i just think its an excuse for an editor to be lazy. i guess its easier to call a writer lazt because they wont concede your demands as opposed to calling yourself lazy because you dont want to make things convenient for the writer. thats all im saying.
fuck, i said ‘slush pile’
i mean: dumbasses
yeah, maybe it cuts down on random submissions, but i wouldnt say it effects the quality of the submission. i read for a print issue of a journal that i know lots of folks read and respect, and we got just as much shitty shitty shit through postal mail as we did through email. i didnt see a correlation between the quality of the writing and the method in which it is submitted.
i just think its an excuse for an editor to be lazy. i guess its easier to call a writer lazt because they wont concede your demands as opposed to calling yourself lazy because you dont want to make things convenient for the writer. thats all im saying.
i dont think anyone is being called lazy really. its more just: are you even in the ballpark?
other people’s thoughts?
i dont think anyone is being called lazy really. its more just: are you even in the ballpark?
other people’s thoughts?
“I wanted to taper off the amount of electronic submissions, but not lose a potentially great story written by a writer that is perhaps too lazy to make it to the post office”
blake, i dont think you are trying to call anyone lazy, but the article certainly implies it. and i just think thats a shitty attitude to have.
“I wanted to taper off the amount of electronic submissions, but not lose a potentially great story written by a writer that is perhaps too lazy to make it to the post office”
blake, i dont think you are trying to call anyone lazy, but the article certainly implies it. and i just think thats a shitty attitude to have.
I haven’t submit via the postal system in almost two years. Because I am lazy. Every day I say to myself, you know, I should send this to Cutbank. Or The Nebraska Review. I have a postal place AROUND THE CORNER from my house. I don’t even have to cross a fucking street. And I never do it. Well, not for almost two years. Honestly, I wish I could say it is because I care about the environment. But that would be a lie.
So that’s that. I almost never wake up before 11am, too. There is a picture of my boobs on dictionary.com if you look up “lazy.”
As far as what editors should or should not do, I can’t weigh in on this, because the world has changed so much since I last did an editorial work. I read for a great print journal for years has an associate editor. Then I was the managining editor and read most submissions (I had one intern to help) for a very prestigious small press that’s been around (and still is) for like 50 years. I read and read and read. There was no such thing as online submissions. You learn how to read efficiently ( a horrible thing for me– I am glad I have unlearned) , you know you are going to miss some gems, and you just do your best. It’s also good to be able to delegate to people you trust- you can’t do everything. That’s what I tell my kids about life, so that’s what I feel about editors too. It’s all the same.
I haven’t submit via the postal system in almost two years. Because I am lazy. Every day I say to myself, you know, I should send this to Cutbank. Or The Nebraska Review. I have a postal place AROUND THE CORNER from my house. I don’t even have to cross a fucking street. And I never do it. Well, not for almost two years. Honestly, I wish I could say it is because I care about the environment. But that would be a lie.
So that’s that. I almost never wake up before 11am, too. There is a picture of my boobs on dictionary.com if you look up “lazy.”
As far as what editors should or should not do, I can’t weigh in on this, because the world has changed so much since I last did an editorial work. I read for a great print journal for years has an associate editor. Then I was the managining editor and read most submissions (I had one intern to help) for a very prestigious small press that’s been around (and still is) for like 50 years. I read and read and read. There was no such thing as online submissions. You learn how to read efficiently ( a horrible thing for me– I am glad I have unlearned) , you know you are going to miss some gems, and you just do your best. It’s also good to be able to delegate to people you trust- you can’t do everything. That’s what I tell my kids about life, so that’s what I feel about editors too. It’s all the same.
pr:
why your boobs? what makes them lazy?
i agree, im not overly concerned about the environment, and i dont care how editors run their journals. i just think name calling is shitty.
unless its me name calling, then its justified and should be tolerated for the betterment of civilization.
I think electronic submissions attract as much shit as postal submissions – maybe NY Tyrant’s experience is different, but the journals I’ve either edited or read for get as much shit either way – there are the lazy pieces that come in electronically, there are the yellowed, typewritten manifestos with handwritten corrections all over them that the writer has apparently been sending around for years. For me, taking print submissions is insanity from a management perspective – cataloging subs, passing subs out to readers, handling inquiries, rejection slips, etc. – far more trouble than electronic subs, but everybody’s got their method.
fuck the author.
if they can’t do it, don’t send.
i don’t send to GA review because they are too strict, and I don’t care enough. If I cared enough, if they published shit that made me want to follow their rules, I would do it. fuck me.
to ‘give up’ on sending your work somewhere because you don’t feel like following the guidelines is your own problem. suck one.
i don’t mean you barry, i mean anyone.
the editor is not there for your convenience. they didn’t start a magazine to make it ‘easy’ on you. they are doing you a favor by considering your work. yes, a favor. though it is also some kind of gift from the author to the editor when something blooms there, that is beside the point of this point in point i think.
most editors don’t even get a thank you from the authors in their magazine, at least in my experience, and what i’ve heard. and i don’t need thank yous. it’s not a labor of love, but if an editor wants to make it easier and more convenient to slub through the massive gobs of utter shit that is sent out every day, more power to it.
my last 2 cents.
pr:
why your boobs? what makes them lazy?
i agree, im not overly concerned about the environment, and i dont care how editors run their journals. i just think name calling is shitty.
unless its me name calling, then its justified and should be tolerated for the betterment of civilization.
I think electronic submissions attract as much shit as postal submissions – maybe NY Tyrant’s experience is different, but the journals I’ve either edited or read for get as much shit either way – there are the lazy pieces that come in electronically, there are the yellowed, typewritten manifestos with handwritten corrections all over them that the writer has apparently been sending around for years. For me, taking print submissions is insanity from a management perspective – cataloging subs, passing subs out to readers, handling inquiries, rejection slips, etc. – far more trouble than electronic subs, but everybody’s got their method.
fuck the author.
if they can’t do it, don’t send.
i don’t send to GA review because they are too strict, and I don’t care enough. If I cared enough, if they published shit that made me want to follow their rules, I would do it. fuck me.
to ‘give up’ on sending your work somewhere because you don’t feel like following the guidelines is your own problem. suck one.
i don’t mean you barry, i mean anyone.
the editor is not there for your convenience. they didn’t start a magazine to make it ‘easy’ on you. they are doing you a favor by considering your work. yes, a favor. though it is also some kind of gift from the author to the editor when something blooms there, that is beside the point of this point in point i think.
most editors don’t even get a thank you from the authors in their magazine, at least in my experience, and what i’ve heard. and i don’t need thank yous. it’s not a labor of love, but if an editor wants to make it easier and more convenient to slub through the massive gobs of utter shit that is sent out every day, more power to it.
my last 2 cents.
we’re not talking about solicited subs here. we’re talking out blind queries. ‘check me out.’
if i want to be in a magazine, i can go to the post office. i can spend a couple bucks. i can kill a tree.
we’re not talking about solicited subs here. we’re talking out blind queries. ‘check me out.’
if i want to be in a magazine, i can go to the post office. i can spend a couple bucks. i can kill a tree.
Matt K’s take in interesting. Yes, I remember all the FOLDERS full of subs and the tracking and piles and piles…Hmm. Going electronic cuts back on all that a bit, I’m sure.
Matt K’s take in interesting. Yes, I remember all the FOLDERS full of subs and the tracking and piles and piles…Hmm. Going electronic cuts back on all that a bit, I’m sure.
ha.
i agree, the editor is not there to make it easy for a writer to get published. but they should be there to ensure that great writing gets read and considered, and ultimately published if it is great. i know the term great is subjective, but you get the point. so why not make the process of submitting as convenient and hassle free as possible. thats all i mean.
and i dont mean easy or convenient in the way you are implying.
but ultimately i agree, if you dont like the guidelines dont submit.
im done talking about this. i want to talk about pr’s boobs again.
ha.
i agree, the editor is not there to make it easy for a writer to get published. but they should be there to ensure that great writing gets read and considered, and ultimately published if it is great. i know the term great is subjective, but you get the point. so why not make the process of submitting as convenient and hassle free as possible. thats all i mean.
and i dont mean easy or convenient in the way you are implying.
but ultimately i agree, if you dont like the guidelines dont submit.
im done talking about this. i want to talk about pr’s boobs again.
boobs. who is pr anyway? do i know pr?
We are kind of lazy. This is unquestionable. But I do want to give the stories a fair chance. We don’t have any readers. When we open up to electronic submissions, we get ransacked, and I like to give the stories submitted a fair chance. I can’t sit down and go through a stack at a time. Things get too muddled and something might get passed up. This is probably just me though. I thought there might be some strong feelings about this.
I guess I’ll see how this all turns out. So far, I liked the 3 sentences from one guy and he sent the story and I liked it as well. I was wrong two other times and I was right two more times. Others I haven’t checked yet (lazy).
This might all be a bad idea. Oh no.
Might not though.
boobs. who is pr anyway? do i know pr?
We are kind of lazy. This is unquestionable. But I do want to give the stories a fair chance. We don’t have any readers. When we open up to electronic submissions, we get ransacked, and I like to give the stories submitted a fair chance. I can’t sit down and go through a stack at a time. Things get too muddled and something might get passed up. This is probably just me though. I thought there might be some strong feelings about this.
I guess I’ll see how this all turns out. So far, I liked the 3 sentences from one guy and he sent the story and I liked it as well. I was wrong two other times and I was right two more times. Others I haven’t checked yet (lazy).
This might all be a bad idea. Oh no.
Might not though.
even if she wants her identity to be left anon. i think she should still show us her boobs. at the very least. ive never seen smart boobs before.
even if she wants her identity to be left anon. i think she should still show us her boobs. at the very least. ive never seen smart boobs before.
I’m one your regular commenters, Blake.
Hi Barry….
I’m one your regular commenters, Blake.
Hi Barry….
yes i have seen ‘pr’ a many times. i was just wondering if i knew more than that
yes i have seen ‘pr’ a many times. i was just wondering if i knew more than that
Gian- you’re just trying something out. What the hell. Overwhelmitude is a big problem with a a successful journal. Anyway, good luck. I still like the graph idea better than three sentences, but it’s your journal, man! I like your journal, too. You are going to miss things- that’s life. But you do good shit, so don’t sweat it.
I’ll send in a pic of my anon boobs for boobs friday.
bg plus pr 4ever
Gian- you’re just trying something out. What the hell. Overwhelmitude is a big problem with a a successful journal. Anyway, good luck. I still like the graph idea better than three sentences, but it’s your journal, man! I like your journal, too. You are going to miss things- that’s life. But you do good shit, so don’t sweat it.
I’ll send in a pic of my anon boobs for boobs friday.
bg plus pr 4ever
I kind of like the idea of sending three sentences – most readers I know for journals read a story until they don’t like it, which is often, unfortunately, early in the story. So, sending three sentences seems to me to be a way to possibly get a better read.
Blake – I agree with you that editors aren’t there to make it easy on writers, and I’m not sure this actually contradicts anything you’re saying, but I don’t think the editor is any more/less important in the cycle – I feel like ideally, there should be a triple reach-around of writer/editor/reader (I can demo this metaphor for you at AWP) – this isn’t a comment on whether the editor should make things easy on a writer, but I do think that the editors owe as much to the writers as the writers to the editor. The whole ‘system’ (if that’s a fair thing to say, hence the quotes) is a little fucked in that there really aren’t that many true readers (I would guess that most readers of journals are themselves writers) and there are way more good writers than there are journals, so the editor holds some power, but if we break it down, most writers, when published, give their stories to the journal, so in that sense I think the editor and writer owe each other a big hug on acceptance because both are winners in the transaction.
I kind of like the idea of sending three sentences – most readers I know for journals read a story until they don’t like it, which is often, unfortunately, early in the story. So, sending three sentences seems to me to be a way to possibly get a better read.
Blake – I agree with you that editors aren’t there to make it easy on writers, and I’m not sure this actually contradicts anything you’re saying, but I don’t think the editor is any more/less important in the cycle – I feel like ideally, there should be a triple reach-around of writer/editor/reader (I can demo this metaphor for you at AWP) – this isn’t a comment on whether the editor should make things easy on a writer, but I do think that the editors owe as much to the writers as the writers to the editor. The whole ‘system’ (if that’s a fair thing to say, hence the quotes) is a little fucked in that there really aren’t that many true readers (I would guess that most readers of journals are themselves writers) and there are way more good writers than there are journals, so the editor holds some power, but if we break it down, most writers, when published, give their stories to the journal, so in that sense I think the editor and writer owe each other a big hug on acceptance because both are winners in the transaction.
I like the graph idea. That is probably a better idea.
I like the graph idea. That is probably a better idea.
triple reacharound live demo scheduled 3 PM friday at barrelhouse booth
i’ll wear my tube socks
i agree, though, matt. the 3 way is vital. we’re all just making shit up as we go along, which is where the fun is.
triple reacharound live demo scheduled 3 PM friday at barrelhouse booth
i’ll wear my tube socks
i agree, though, matt. the 3 way is vital. we’re all just making shit up as we go along, which is where the fun is.
Matt is smart. I’ll add that even though most readers of journals are writers themselves, in that moment of reading, you are a reader and – the reader does matter the most. Babel is right. When I read I read as a reader first and as a writer second, and only if I really like the piece and think I can get something out of it. I also read as- a woman, a mother, a white person, a lazy person, and and so on. So just because I read and am a writer, doesn’t have to blur those two things. So, it is a three way thing. I like the hugging grateful thing, too. More gratitude in the world is always a good thing.
Matt is smart. I’ll add that even though most readers of journals are writers themselves, in that moment of reading, you are a reader and – the reader does matter the most. Babel is right. When I read I read as a reader first and as a writer second, and only if I really like the piece and think I can get something out of it. I also read as- a woman, a mother, a white person, a lazy person, and and so on. So just because I read and am a writer, doesn’t have to blur those two things. So, it is a three way thing. I like the hugging grateful thing, too. More gratitude in the world is always a good thing.
ahhhhh… from submission guidelines to 3 ways.
html giant is the future of america.
ahhhhh… from submission guidelines to 3 ways.
html giant is the future of america.
i have more to say, but i do wnat to say this in sort of ‘defense’ of gian, i guess. not that he needs defense, but i dont konw. i have told some people this before, because it really exploded my mind that an ed did this:
maybe gian is lazy, i dont know. i doubt it. but i submitted to him a few months ago blindly. i had done research, i knew i liked tyrant and the authors he printed, etc, but i sent to him without bothering to ‘check’ guidelines. i snet sim sub to a few other journals like tyrant. anyhow, turns otu i submitted when he was ‘closed’ to unsolicited. gian could have easily deleted my email without reading it. i had broken two of his rules. i was that guy. i dont know wha tpossessed him to read the sub, but he did and things worked out.
i dont know if iwas suppoesd to say that. it probably doesnt matter?
editors can to whatever the fuck they want.
anyhow, what gian did with my sub doesnt strike me as lazy. that seems very giving to me, or at least patient. patient and giving.
this 3 sentence and/or paragraph thing is a new guideline, but i imagine for gian (and plenty other eds as mattk suggests and for me when i read noö subs) it is sort of an ‘inhouse’ thing? gian is making public something that already maybe goes on when reading subs? it is all about the sentence. that sentence.
i like the first of those three examples the best because of “unless you can understand just how emotional a thing as simple as drapery can make me” and “filthy” and “seek my shelter.” the last sentence in example 1 i do not like; itdrops out of it in my opinon.
i have more to say, but i do wnat to say this in sort of ‘defense’ of gian, i guess. not that he needs defense, but i dont konw. i have told some people this before, because it really exploded my mind that an ed did this:
maybe gian is lazy, i dont know. i doubt it. but i submitted to him a few months ago blindly. i had done research, i knew i liked tyrant and the authors he printed, etc, but i sent to him without bothering to ‘check’ guidelines. i snet sim sub to a few other journals like tyrant. anyhow, turns otu i submitted when he was ‘closed’ to unsolicited. gian could have easily deleted my email without reading it. i had broken two of his rules. i was that guy. i dont know wha tpossessed him to read the sub, but he did and things worked out.
i dont know if iwas suppoesd to say that. it probably doesnt matter?
editors can to whatever the fuck they want.
anyhow, what gian did with my sub doesnt strike me as lazy. that seems very giving to me, or at least patient. patient and giving.
this 3 sentence and/or paragraph thing is a new guideline, but i imagine for gian (and plenty other eds as mattk suggests and for me when i read noö subs) it is sort of an ‘inhouse’ thing? gian is making public something that already maybe goes on when reading subs? it is all about the sentence. that sentence.
i like the first of those three examples the best because of “unless you can understand just how emotional a thing as simple as drapery can make me” and “filthy” and “seek my shelter.” the last sentence in example 1 i do not like; itdrops out of it in my opinon.
dammit ryan. we’ve already moved on to three ways. why digress?
dammit ryan. we’ve already moved on to three ways. why digress?
sorry. thats what happens when you come late.
sorry. thats what happens when you come late.
ha. good points you’re making though.
ha. good points you’re making though.
Man, since I asked Blake to post this this morning, I have received ten submissions. THREE of them have included the BEST THREE SENTENCES. The rest have included the whole story, five or six sentences, or like the first couple paragraphs. So, looks like people don’t want to follow the rules. That’s cool though. Because now I don’t have to reply to them and can finish reading Revolutionary Road, which I highly recommend.
Man, since I asked Blake to post this this morning, I have received ten submissions. THREE of them have included the BEST THREE SENTENCES. The rest have included the whole story, five or six sentences, or like the first couple paragraphs. So, looks like people don’t want to follow the rules. That’s cool though. Because now I don’t have to reply to them and can finish reading Revolutionary Road, which I highly recommend.
its interesting that when certain names you recognize break your rules you go ahead and read the sub anyway, but i guess not everyone gets the name recognition treatment, eh?
i guess its a good thing editors can do whatever the fuck they want.
its interesting that when certain names you recognize break your rules you go ahead and read the sub anyway, but i guess not everyone gets the name recognition treatment, eh?
i guess its a good thing editors can do whatever the fuck they want.
ah. that is true. i did not even think about that part. i agree, actually. if i recgnoze a name, sometimes ill bump ahead and look at it.
so, um, as barry said. take what i commented earlier, then, with that in mind.
ah. that is true. i did not even think about that part. i agree, actually. if i recgnoze a name, sometimes ill bump ahead and look at it.
so, um, as barry said. take what i commented earlier, then, with that in mind.
No. Not everyone gets the name recognition treatment. But Ryan does.
No. Not everyone gets the name recognition treatment. But Ryan does.
that is kind of awesome, an easy filtering of who read the guidelines. i am going to add something cryptic to my own journals to see who read the guidelines, then i can siphon through as if in a rolodex. that sounds more pleasing.
‘take a picture of yourself covered in shit and attach it to your prose poem cycle.’
that is kind of awesome, an easy filtering of who read the guidelines. i am going to add something cryptic to my own journals to see who read the guidelines, then i can siphon through as if in a rolodex. that sounds more pleasing.
‘take a picture of yourself covered in shit and attach it to your prose poem cycle.’
That is disgusting and I cannotstoplaughing
You could be on to something here, Blake. If the stories aren’t any good, at least you would have all those sweet pictures of writers covered in shit to post on HTML.
Genius. OWN!
That is disgusting and I cannotstoplaughing
You could be on to something here, Blake. If the stories aren’t any good, at least you would have all those sweet pictures of writers covered in shit to post on HTML.
Genius. OWN!
I am anti-guidelines mostly. As a writer I don’t like to have to be my own filter. I just want to send stuff and let editors be filters. I assume its in their best interest to let as much stuff in and then be good filters.
I am anti-guidelines mostly. As a writer I don’t like to have to be my own filter. I just want to send stuff and let editors be filters. I assume its in their best interest to let as much stuff in and then be good filters.
does the best three sentences also apply to book submissions?
does the best three sentences also apply to book submissions?
i have th selfawareness of a sea cucumber
i have th selfawareness of a sea cucumber
Several markets that only accept postal submissions also take a lot longer to respond than those that take electronic (or both). Not always, of course, but estimated response time is a big factor for me, so I often find myself submitting electronically. And there’s the fact that it’s free. =p
Several markets that only accept postal submissions also take a lot longer to respond than those that take electronic (or both). Not always, of course, but estimated response time is a big factor for me, so I often find myself submitting electronically. And there’s the fact that it’s free. =p