October 6th, 2009 / 2:36 pm
Snippets

But no, really: why submit to magazines you don’t read? Are you a prostitute? What will it gain you in the end?

158 Comments

  1. joseph

      Read on a regular basis or “have read?”

  2. joseph

      Read on a regular basis or “have read?”

  3. Blake Butler

      have read, give a shit about, believe in, lick

  4. Blake Butler

      have read, give a shit about, believe in, lick

  5. joseph

      Oh. Well, then… no rebuttal.

  6. joseph

      Oh. Well, then… no rebuttal.

  7. Brad Green

      Why for the fame and notoriety, of course! Not to mention all the girls and money!

  8. Brad Green

      Why for the fame and notoriety, of course! Not to mention all the girls and money!

  9. jensen

      it surprised me how long it took me to figure this one out, though. i think a lot of people submit to magazines they think are supposed to be where they are submitting. i did. now i only submit to places i both read and like. this has narrowed the field pretty considerably but in good ways.

  10. jensen

      it surprised me how long it took me to figure this one out, though. i think a lot of people submit to magazines they think are supposed to be where they are submitting. i did. now i only submit to places i both read and like. this has narrowed the field pretty considerably but in good ways.

  11. Brad Green

      A lot of truth to the above.

  12. Rauan

      in the end, the end-end, nothing gains you,….

  13. Brad Green

      A lot of truth to the above.

  14. Rauan

      in the end, the end-end, nothing gains you,….

  15. Blake Butler

      yeah, it is a mistake inherent in the process i think. mostly out of desperation or not knowing what to do: that really there is little pleasure in publishing somewhere that means nothing to you. it’s like sex. took me a good while to realize also. but i’m not sure why either. one blank should spell enough, but you keep thinking it will change if you do it more. it doesn’t.

  16. Blake Butler

      yeah, it is a mistake inherent in the process i think. mostly out of desperation or not knowing what to do: that really there is little pleasure in publishing somewhere that means nothing to you. it’s like sex. took me a good while to realize also. but i’m not sure why either. one blank should spell enough, but you keep thinking it will change if you do it more. it doesn’t.

  17. Brad Green

      The basic reason people keep doing that is for validation, right? That what they’re working so diligently on is at least appreciated by someone else? Even if it’s only one person on the other side of a Gmail connection.

      At least it was that way for me in the early beginning.

  18. Brad Green

      The basic reason people keep doing that is for validation, right? That what they’re working so diligently on is at least appreciated by someone else? Even if it’s only one person on the other side of a Gmail connection.

      At least it was that way for me in the early beginning.

  19. Lincoln

      Do not do this anymore. Did when I was younger and wish I hadn’t.

  20. Lincoln

      Do not do this anymore. Did when I was younger and wish I hadn’t.

  21. Lincoln

      Well part of it has to do with how hard it is to publish in a good magazine, so many feel they need to submit to 20 magazines to have a shot and they probably can’t read them all. Many more submit to like 50 magazines or more.

  22. Lincoln

      Well part of it has to do with how hard it is to publish in a good magazine, so many feel they need to submit to 20 magazines to have a shot and they probably can’t read them all. Many more submit to like 50 magazines or more.

  23. david erlewine

      Sean Lovelace has made this point quite convincingly. I’m not issues a nachos-type challenge, by the by. ha ha

      I don’t sub to mags I don’t read. As I have said on here, somewhat ashamedly, I don’t buy anywhere near the print journals I want to, books either. For that reason, and as much of a sub ho as I have been this year, I have not sub’d to any strictly print journal. I am making some changes in lifestye to allow me to spend considerably more on print mags like Barrelhouse, Unsaid, etc. Once I read such print content, I will consider submitting to said journals.

  24. david erlewine

      Sean Lovelace has made this point quite convincingly. I’m not issues a nachos-type challenge, by the by. ha ha

      I don’t sub to mags I don’t read. As I have said on here, somewhat ashamedly, I don’t buy anywhere near the print journals I want to, books either. For that reason, and as much of a sub ho as I have been this year, I have not sub’d to any strictly print journal. I am making some changes in lifestye to allow me to spend considerably more on print mags like Barrelhouse, Unsaid, etc. Once I read such print content, I will consider submitting to said journals.

  25. david erlewine

      word

  26. david erlewine

      word

  27. darby

      like jensen, this mindframe took me a while to come to. Ceasing sim subbing helped with this, in that it forced me to have to really care about where I send work. And I like this, it makes me feel better about what I write and more satisfied when things get accepted.

      On the other hand, I don’t like this mindframe on a macro scale, or from an editor’s pov. For me, as an editor, the ideal scenario is that everyone should sim sub everything everywhere, because that will enable the most options available for editors, and ensure that work finds the place where it belongs the most. Then it would become an editor’s game because everyone is basically looking at the same slush pile, it’s who reads and responds the fastest wins, and editors of different magazines would have to fight over the same piece and negotiate, and then it’s a highest bidder war, etc. that’s my fantasy.

  28. darby

      like jensen, this mindframe took me a while to come to. Ceasing sim subbing helped with this, in that it forced me to have to really care about where I send work. And I like this, it makes me feel better about what I write and more satisfied when things get accepted.

      On the other hand, I don’t like this mindframe on a macro scale, or from an editor’s pov. For me, as an editor, the ideal scenario is that everyone should sim sub everything everywhere, because that will enable the most options available for editors, and ensure that work finds the place where it belongs the most. Then it would become an editor’s game because everyone is basically looking at the same slush pile, it’s who reads and responds the fastest wins, and editors of different magazines would have to fight over the same piece and negotiate, and then it’s a highest bidder war, etc. that’s my fantasy.

  29. Mike Meginnis

      I can’t afford to buy every magazine I’d like to be in. I try to only submit to places I think I would like. I don’t feel great about it, but the alternative is worse.

  30. Mike Meginnis

      I can’t afford to buy every magazine I’d like to be in. I try to only submit to places I think I would like. I don’t feel great about it, but the alternative is worse.

  31. Ken Baumann

      ‘Then it would become an editor’s game because everyone is basically looking at the same slush pile, it’s who reads and responds the fastest wins, and editors of different magazines would have to fight over the same piece and negotiate, and then it’s a highest bidder war, etc. that’s my fantasy.’

      oh god no

  32. Ken Baumann

      ‘Then it would become an editor’s game because everyone is basically looking at the same slush pile, it’s who reads and responds the fastest wins, and editors of different magazines would have to fight over the same piece and negotiate, and then it’s a highest bidder war, etc. that’s my fantasy.’

      oh god no

  33. Lincoln

      yikes….

  34. Lincoln

      yikes….

  35. MIchael James

      Can you like a magazine you’ve never read much how you can like a girl you’ve only seen but never actually spoken to?

  36. MIchael James

      Can you like a magazine you’ve never read much how you can like a girl you’ve only seen but never actually spoken to?

  37. Blake Butler

      you can like a magazine you haven’t read’s tits as much as you can like a girl you’ve only seen but not spoken to but you can not love its heart

  38. Blake Butler

      you can like a magazine you haven’t read’s tits as much as you can like a girl you’ve only seen but not spoken to but you can not love its heart

  39. Blake Butler

      some magazines have really great tits

      and no heart

  40. joseph

      It’s like being attracted to Celebrities.

      I’d like to have sex with Audrey Tautou.

      and Wayne Coyne.

      The desire I have to have sex with Audrey Tautou or Wayne Coyne is comparable to my desire to be published in, let’s say, Lungfull! or Ninth Letter I haven’t spoken to Audrey or Wayne, and I haven’t nearly read every issue of Lungfull! or Ninth Letter, yet somehow all of these things are sexy.

  41. Matthew Simmons

      Actually, it is because I am a prostitute.

  42. Blake Butler

      some magazines have really great tits

      and no heart

  43. joseph

      It’s like being attracted to Celebrities.

      I’d like to have sex with Audrey Tautou.

      and Wayne Coyne.

      The desire I have to have sex with Audrey Tautou or Wayne Coyne is comparable to my desire to be published in, let’s say, Lungfull! or Ninth Letter I haven’t spoken to Audrey or Wayne, and I haven’t nearly read every issue of Lungfull! or Ninth Letter, yet somehow all of these things are sexy.

  44. Matthew Simmons

      Actually, it is because I am a prostitute.

  45. Brad Green

      Oh my god, Blake is talking about heart!

  46. Brad Green

      Oh my god, Blake is talking about heart!

  47. Blake Butler

      oh you stop that ;)

  48. Blake Butler

      oh you stop that ;)

  49. chris

      Reason why folks submit to mags they don’t read: There are more people trying to be writers than there are people buying books. People are in love with the IDEA of becoming a writer more than they are interested in telling a good story. Kind of a depressing when you think about it, espescially when you run a magazine. However, this notion is the backbone of every single MFA program in the country.

  50. chris

      Reason why folks submit to mags they don’t read: There are more people trying to be writers than there are people buying books. People are in love with the IDEA of becoming a writer more than they are interested in telling a good story. Kind of a depressing when you think about it, espescially when you run a magazine. However, this notion is the backbone of every single MFA program in the country.

  51. Nathan Tyree

      have read is my thing. I don’t sub to a ‘zine without reading an issue (unless they are new and haven’t put out an issue)

  52. Nathan Tyree

      have read is my thing. I don’t sub to a ‘zine without reading an issue (unless they are new and haven’t put out an issue)

  53. Nathan Tyree

      you laugh. There are girls. No money, no money, but girls. Yes yes

  54. Nathan Tyree

      you laugh. There are girls. No money, no money, but girls. Yes yes

  55. Blake Butler

      heart isn’t heart

      heart is hid

  56. Blake Butler

      heart isn’t heart

      heart is hid

  57. Nathan Tyree

      I am with you

  58. Nathan Tyree

      I am with you

  59. Nathan Tyree

      The heart is a muscle the size of a fist

  60. Nathan Tyree

      The heart is a muscle the size of a fist

  61. Nathan Tyree

      my desire to have sex with Audrey Tautou is not at all like my desire to be published in Tin House. Tin House is not wet and warm and does not move like the sea before a storm

  62. Nathan Tyree

      my desire to have sex with Audrey Tautou is not at all like my desire to be published in Tin House. Tin House is not wet and warm and does not move like the sea before a storm

  63. david erlewine

      that’s clive, right? that fucking line was brilliant! he owned judey boy

  64. david erlewine

      that’s clive, right? that fucking line was brilliant! he owned judey boy

  65. david erlewine

      BAM

  66. david erlewine

      BAM

  67. MoGa

      With Darby on this one. In spirit.

  68. MoGa

      With Darby on this one. In spirit.

  69. christopher earl.

      shit son. you nailed it.

      and Blake’s likening the whole charade to meaningly sex is damn poignant. and, by that i mean:
      “3 a : pleasurably stimulating b : being to the point : apt”

  70. christopher earl.

      shit son. you nailed it.

      and Blake’s likening the whole charade to meaningly sex is damn poignant. and, by that i mean:
      “3 a : pleasurably stimulating b : being to the point : apt”

  71. christopher earl.

      meaningless*

      i’m retarded.

  72. christopher earl.

      meaningless*

      i’m retarded.

  73. Lincoln

      Most magazines have more slush than they can deal with in a reasonable manner already. Getting ALL slush at the same time would only make it even harder to deal with and give editors much less time with any given piece.

  74. Lincoln

      Most magazines have more slush than they can deal with in a reasonable manner already. Getting ALL slush at the same time would only make it even harder to deal with and give editors much less time with any given piece.

  75. stu

      I’m more of an ass man, but your point is not lost.

  76. stu

      I’m more of an ass man, but your point is not lost.

  77. Blake Butler

      plus there’s the whole, magazines have different aesthetics thing? if everybody sent everything to everyone it would be an even bigger crush-shit on the hearth.

      in the end, it comes down to an editor’s taste and range reigning more than a specific ‘call for theme’. you can find just about anything in certain journals, thematically, and yet there is a level of quality and cohesion of idea inherent in a good editor’s role.

      this is why most of the best magazines are run by 1 person or by small group, rather than by board or committee. it’s just so hard to get a good viewpoint out of 15 people discussing work.

  78. Blake Butler

      plus there’s the whole, magazines have different aesthetics thing? if everybody sent everything to everyone it would be an even bigger crush-shit on the hearth.

      in the end, it comes down to an editor’s taste and range reigning more than a specific ‘call for theme’. you can find just about anything in certain journals, thematically, and yet there is a level of quality and cohesion of idea inherent in a good editor’s role.

      this is why most of the best magazines are run by 1 person or by small group, rather than by board or committee. it’s just so hard to get a good viewpoint out of 15 people discussing work.

  79. Sean
  80. Sean
  81. Blake Butler

      slut

  82. Blake Butler

      slut

  83. davidpeak

      i used to think i wanted lots of publications–maybe to make myself feel better.

      now i wish i only had a few–maybe at the four or five journals i consistently read.

      i won’t say what they are. i’ve made it into 3/6. i will sub the other 3 until it happens. and then it will have happened and i will wonder what to do next.

  84. davidpeak

      i used to think i wanted lots of publications–maybe to make myself feel better.

      now i wish i only had a few–maybe at the four or five journals i consistently read.

      i won’t say what they are. i’ve made it into 3/6. i will sub the other 3 until it happens. and then it will have happened and i will wonder what to do next.

  85. Sabra

      Well, it’s a good thing I brought a barrel load of buns to this party…

      ;)

  86. Sabra

      Well, it’s a good thing I brought a barrel load of buns to this party…

      ;)

  87. stu

      When I was at university, I was lucky enough to have not one but two stories published in one submission to the campus mag. I’ve submitted to places since but have had no luck. I was thinking that maybe it was because I was only submitting to mags I enjoy and not spreading it around, but… maybe I just suck. I am comfortable with that, actually.

  88. stu

      When I was at university, I was lucky enough to have not one but two stories published in one submission to the campus mag. I’ve submitted to places since but have had no luck. I was thinking that maybe it was because I was only submitting to mags I enjoy and not spreading it around, but… maybe I just suck. I am comfortable with that, actually.

  89. rachel

      Wouldn’t editors be the prostitutes in this construction? Writers would just be the antisocial jerks looking to stick their work in some anonymous inbox.

  90. rachel

      Wouldn’t editors be the prostitutes in this construction? Writers would just be the antisocial jerks looking to stick their work in some anonymous inbox.

  91. Sabra

      I heard a nice thing the other day from a writing professor who said: if a good writer doesn’t care about fame or money that much they could at least consider getting their writing published for the purpose of sharing. To make it more accessible for people seeking to read new things. Perhaps some are more generous than others in that respect. And since most mags don’t pay the pieces are a lot like donations anyway. And it could build confidence to hold something concrete in your hand. Even if it’s not the Mount Everest of cool hang-outs. It’s probably nice to feel like what you make is appreciated.

  92. Sabra

      I heard a nice thing the other day from a writing professor who said: if a good writer doesn’t care about fame or money that much they could at least consider getting their writing published for the purpose of sharing. To make it more accessible for people seeking to read new things. Perhaps some are more generous than others in that respect. And since most mags don’t pay the pieces are a lot like donations anyway. And it could build confidence to hold something concrete in your hand. Even if it’s not the Mount Everest of cool hang-outs. It’s probably nice to feel like what you make is appreciated.

  93. Josh Kleinberg

      Should probably establish that I pretty much don’t submit, but have only ever submitted to places I’ve read and liked and thought, “I have written something similar to what they seem to publish.”

      Isn’t the entire act of submitting sort of slutty, though? Isn’t the primary goal of publishing to “gain audience” (unless you’ve found one of the five places that pay)? If you have no intention of gaining audience, then why not keep everything on your hard drive?

      Submitting somewhere you haven’t read seems unwise just because you’re probably wrong about what they want…but if not, why is it any more slutty to “accidentally” find a place where your piece apparently fits than to find one with greater premeditation?

      Or do you mean submitting to places you think are “bad?” Does that happen? If you don’t think you’ve written something good enough for the places you like, why the hell would you want to show it to strangers?

      “Submitting somewhere you don’t CONSISTENTLY read” seems to belong to one or the other of those categories, depending on your reason for not consistently reading.

      Or are you talking about submitting a “bad” piece to a “bad” place that pays? Yeah. I guess that’d be slutty.

  94. Josh Kleinberg

      Should probably establish that I pretty much don’t submit, but have only ever submitted to places I’ve read and liked and thought, “I have written something similar to what they seem to publish.”

      Isn’t the entire act of submitting sort of slutty, though? Isn’t the primary goal of publishing to “gain audience” (unless you’ve found one of the five places that pay)? If you have no intention of gaining audience, then why not keep everything on your hard drive?

      Submitting somewhere you haven’t read seems unwise just because you’re probably wrong about what they want…but if not, why is it any more slutty to “accidentally” find a place where your piece apparently fits than to find one with greater premeditation?

      Or do you mean submitting to places you think are “bad?” Does that happen? If you don’t think you’ve written something good enough for the places you like, why the hell would you want to show it to strangers?

      “Submitting somewhere you don’t CONSISTENTLY read” seems to belong to one or the other of those categories, depending on your reason for not consistently reading.

      Or are you talking about submitting a “bad” piece to a “bad” place that pays? Yeah. I guess that’d be slutty.

  95. drew kalbach

      submitting based on the humor of this comment alone

  96. drew kalbach

      submitting based on the humor of this comment alone

  97. mike

      oh my god
      this
      THIS THIS THIS

  98. mike

      oh my god
      this
      THIS THIS THIS

  99. darby

      I’m kind of with what I am saying in spirit. It’s a strange hypothetical to think about. I like the idea that it should be hard to be an editor. That the burden of filtering should be on the editor’s shoulders, and if it’s too much slush, editors should design a more efficient, more effective filtering mechanism. This promotes expediency of the whole system, including reducing submission response time, and also a leveling of the playing field amongst all journals. If everyone, of any success level, (crazy hypothetical) is submitting everywhere, than Miranda July’s next story is showing up in Unknown Review’s slush at the same time its showing up in the New Yorker’s.

      What this does though is it assumes a writer-attitude of not caring where or about any of the journal’s they send to. It becomes almost Socialist, writers write and send to Everywhere and not care. They don’t get to choose where they want to be published. A writer now writes purely for the megaslush and simply waits to see where it ends up, if anywhere, and they say, hooray, or they say, oh. But it isolates the writer from the media in a way that is probably not healthy. There would be fewer journals in the end, I think, which means fewer opportunities, and one journal, whichever has the craziest die-hard working editor, ends up with a monopoly, etc.

      Anyway, interesting to think about (hypothetically).

  100. darby

      I’m kind of with what I am saying in spirit. It’s a strange hypothetical to think about. I like the idea that it should be hard to be an editor. That the burden of filtering should be on the editor’s shoulders, and if it’s too much slush, editors should design a more efficient, more effective filtering mechanism. This promotes expediency of the whole system, including reducing submission response time, and also a leveling of the playing field amongst all journals. If everyone, of any success level, (crazy hypothetical) is submitting everywhere, than Miranda July’s next story is showing up in Unknown Review’s slush at the same time its showing up in the New Yorker’s.

      What this does though is it assumes a writer-attitude of not caring where or about any of the journal’s they send to. It becomes almost Socialist, writers write and send to Everywhere and not care. They don’t get to choose where they want to be published. A writer now writes purely for the megaslush and simply waits to see where it ends up, if anywhere, and they say, hooray, or they say, oh. But it isolates the writer from the media in a way that is probably not healthy. There would be fewer journals in the end, I think, which means fewer opportunities, and one journal, whichever has the craziest die-hard working editor, ends up with a monopoly, etc.

      Anyway, interesting to think about (hypothetically).

  101. davidpeak

      if everyone bought 1 copy of every lit mag they submitted to, or if everyone bought 1 book from every press they submitted to, then books could pay for themselves forever.

      i try to keep this in mind whenever submitting.

  102. davidpeak

      if everyone bought 1 copy of every lit mag they submitted to, or if everyone bought 1 book from every press they submitted to, then books could pay for themselves forever.

      i try to keep this in mind whenever submitting.

  103. Corey Izod

      Some of us want readers, want to develop readers outside of the few who always read our work. For your work to engage a heterogeneous field of critical reception, made up of more than twenty people, requires publication in a journal that is itself pitching, communicating, thematising, advertising in its own way. I feel like every publication is a kind of compromise, but if you want your work to live outside of your hard drive, then you’ve got to compromise. And some of us want to devote all our time to writing. To achieve this privilege, it seems to me you’ve got to be published in numerous journals or in some of the big ones for a small to medium sized press to pick you up. Let’s say you love three journals, the rest you’re indifferent towards (sometimes there’s quality, sometimes not). And let’s say over a period of years you are published well in these three journals. In your short bio, if it has just the names of three journals within which you’ve been published, you have only just qualified for what in Australia is called an emerging writer. If it had been two publications, you would still be without distinction from a hobbyist or memoirist. I of course submit to journals I like, but I do also submit to journals I’ve but browsed through. I’d like to ask Blake, since his list of publications is pretty staggering: what was your method in the beginning? Did you really only submit to journals you loved? Forthcoming also, do you love all of these? I think if I was only published in the journals I like here, with a couple of them no simultaneous submissions, three to four months for a reply, that means eight submissions only for an entire year, and with less than 5% success rate in submissions I would estimate it would take me (if I allow myself more success than I have been allowed over the past six years) a decade before my list of publications amounted to writing centre, independent press, unsolicited-manuscript-accepting journal rights of entry. And this is me giving myself way better odds than I have in fact experienced. Yes, I know there are competitions, and yes I know there are presses that will look at novels and collections based purely on the work itself. But let’s not kid ourselves. For many editors, looking at the list of publications and a general gauge of the profile – mostly of whether they’ve ever heard of the writer or not – is the only method for cutting through the proportionately impossible-to-read slush pile for the staff of a journal. I will say though, that the American journals I’ve been sending to have replied far more swiftly than the ones here, Sleepingfish replied in about three weeks, for example. If more editors were of this work ethic and of this kind of consideration towards writers, then things would be better. I think writers have to do whatever the fuck they can to ensure a chance for their writing. Beggars can’t be choosers. When we’re editors for small journals and forthcoming in dozens of journals, perhaps these kind of choices are a lot less urgent.

  104. Corey Izod

      Some of us want readers, want to develop readers outside of the few who always read our work. For your work to engage a heterogeneous field of critical reception, made up of more than twenty people, requires publication in a journal that is itself pitching, communicating, thematising, advertising in its own way. I feel like every publication is a kind of compromise, but if you want your work to live outside of your hard drive, then you’ve got to compromise. And some of us want to devote all our time to writing. To achieve this privilege, it seems to me you’ve got to be published in numerous journals or in some of the big ones for a small to medium sized press to pick you up. Let’s say you love three journals, the rest you’re indifferent towards (sometimes there’s quality, sometimes not). And let’s say over a period of years you are published well in these three journals. In your short bio, if it has just the names of three journals within which you’ve been published, you have only just qualified for what in Australia is called an emerging writer. If it had been two publications, you would still be without distinction from a hobbyist or memoirist. I of course submit to journals I like, but I do also submit to journals I’ve but browsed through. I’d like to ask Blake, since his list of publications is pretty staggering: what was your method in the beginning? Did you really only submit to journals you loved? Forthcoming also, do you love all of these? I think if I was only published in the journals I like here, with a couple of them no simultaneous submissions, three to four months for a reply, that means eight submissions only for an entire year, and with less than 5% success rate in submissions I would estimate it would take me (if I allow myself more success than I have been allowed over the past six years) a decade before my list of publications amounted to writing centre, independent press, unsolicited-manuscript-accepting journal rights of entry. And this is me giving myself way better odds than I have in fact experienced. Yes, I know there are competitions, and yes I know there are presses that will look at novels and collections based purely on the work itself. But let’s not kid ourselves. For many editors, looking at the list of publications and a general gauge of the profile – mostly of whether they’ve ever heard of the writer or not – is the only method for cutting through the proportionately impossible-to-read slush pile for the staff of a journal. I will say though, that the American journals I’ve been sending to have replied far more swiftly than the ones here, Sleepingfish replied in about three weeks, for example. If more editors were of this work ethic and of this kind of consideration towards writers, then things would be better. I think writers have to do whatever the fuck they can to ensure a chance for their writing. Beggars can’t be choosers. When we’re editors for small journals and forthcoming in dozens of journals, perhaps these kind of choices are a lot less urgent.

  105. barry

      yeah, i think there’s “reading” on two levels.

      do you mean, put in the effort to go online and look at a site and read an issue or two, or do you mean actually respect/admire the contributors and the content.

      when i first started submitting i would submit to journals i read and liked, and if i read stories i liked from other people, i would read their bios and see where they were published, then check those journals out and if i liked them i would submit.

      now i submit things so rarely unless i’m asked by an editor or unless i hear about a brand new journal that i really really like, ie kill author, pank, abjective, etc. (i’m 2 out of 3 if you care)

      but otherwise there is only one or two journals i send things to, and they arent just journals i read, they are journals i admire and respect.

  106. Lincoln

      I feel like one effect of this hypothetical would be to spread the quality work so thin across the board that no journal would be worth buying or reading because you’d only have one or two good pieces in each.

  107. barry

      yeah, i think there’s “reading” on two levels.

      do you mean, put in the effort to go online and look at a site and read an issue or two, or do you mean actually respect/admire the contributors and the content.

      when i first started submitting i would submit to journals i read and liked, and if i read stories i liked from other people, i would read their bios and see where they were published, then check those journals out and if i liked them i would submit.

      now i submit things so rarely unless i’m asked by an editor or unless i hear about a brand new journal that i really really like, ie kill author, pank, abjective, etc. (i’m 2 out of 3 if you care)

      but otherwise there is only one or two journals i send things to, and they arent just journals i read, they are journals i admire and respect.

  108. Lincoln

      I feel like one effect of this hypothetical would be to spread the quality work so thin across the board that no journal would be worth buying or reading because you’d only have one or two good pieces in each.

  109. Andrew Sierra

      no, because the writers in this situations are the one with the commodity (their writing) which they will give to anyone who is willing to compensate them for it (either in recognition or, more rarely, in the form of actual cash money)

      the editors are the johns not the prostitutes in this situation, because they are able to choose from any one of the prostitutes (writers) they want and the writer doesnt care who they are as long as they compensate them for it

      this has been “johns and prostitutes” with andrew sierra

  110. Andrew Sierra

      no, because the writers in this situations are the one with the commodity (their writing) which they will give to anyone who is willing to compensate them for it (either in recognition or, more rarely, in the form of actual cash money)

      the editors are the johns not the prostitutes in this situation, because they are able to choose from any one of the prostitutes (writers) they want and the writer doesnt care who they are as long as they compensate them for it

      this has been “johns and prostitutes” with andrew sierra

  111. darby

      I don’t see that. In fact, I don’t see it as being much different than it is now, only the driving factor is the effort of the editor, so there would probably be a handful of editors of journals who are really workaholic, smart, opportunistic people who can afford to devote ALL their time to it, who jump on every good thing, and they run the top tier journals, and everything else falls under. Some who have different aesthetics, grab the different aesthetic ones, etc. Not much difference.

      The difference is in intention, and maybe that’s what you mean when you say creativity is spread thin. Why write for a megaslush? Shouldn’t I be allowed to want to be in journal A more than journal B? In order to care about my writing, I kind of want to write for somewhere I feel good about. Otherwise it’s all so impersonal that there’s no desire to do it in the first place.

  112. darby

      I don’t see that. In fact, I don’t see it as being much different than it is now, only the driving factor is the effort of the editor, so there would probably be a handful of editors of journals who are really workaholic, smart, opportunistic people who can afford to devote ALL their time to it, who jump on every good thing, and they run the top tier journals, and everything else falls under. Some who have different aesthetics, grab the different aesthetic ones, etc. Not much difference.

      The difference is in intention, and maybe that’s what you mean when you say creativity is spread thin. Why write for a megaslush? Shouldn’t I be allowed to want to be in journal A more than journal B? In order to care about my writing, I kind of want to write for somewhere I feel good about. Otherwise it’s all so impersonal that there’s no desire to do it in the first place.

  113. Roxane

      Word.

  114. Roxane

      Word.

  115. Lincoln

      I guess it depends on the parameters of the hypothetical. I think on a realistic level, you’d have far far more slush than anyone could deal with. We are talking like hundreds a day. What most magazines would probably do is sort by cover letter and only read shit from writers who’d already proved themselves. That seems like cheating the system, so maybe these are blind submissions too?

      In that case, editors would simply have to either read the first line of each piece or farm out the work to a few dozen readers per magazine. Either way, they would have no way to ensure high quality when it is a speed race and/or the work is farmed out to so many likely unqualified readers. In addition, there would be all this pressure to accept any story you are somewhat happy with, because if you wait too long another editor has snatched all the stories up. So that would dilute quality as well.

      Are the editors forced to read in the same order here? If not, then editors would figure out some way to read different stuff from what eveyrone else is reading, stagger it in some way.

      Or perhaps what would happen is the best funded journals would simply spend all their money on editors and readers to ensure they could get the best stuff and writers would get even less money.

  116. Lincoln

      I guess it depends on the parameters of the hypothetical. I think on a realistic level, you’d have far far more slush than anyone could deal with. We are talking like hundreds a day. What most magazines would probably do is sort by cover letter and only read shit from writers who’d already proved themselves. That seems like cheating the system, so maybe these are blind submissions too?

      In that case, editors would simply have to either read the first line of each piece or farm out the work to a few dozen readers per magazine. Either way, they would have no way to ensure high quality when it is a speed race and/or the work is farmed out to so many likely unqualified readers. In addition, there would be all this pressure to accept any story you are somewhat happy with, because if you wait too long another editor has snatched all the stories up. So that would dilute quality as well.

      Are the editors forced to read in the same order here? If not, then editors would figure out some way to read different stuff from what eveyrone else is reading, stagger it in some way.

      Or perhaps what would happen is the best funded journals would simply spend all their money on editors and readers to ensure they could get the best stuff and writers would get even less money.

  117. Fucknigga

      Yeah, what he said.

  118. Fucknigga

      Yeah, what he said.

  119. Ben White

      Yep, that’s the one. Along with publication lists being a proxy for penis size.

  120. Ben White

      Yep, that’s the one. Along with publication lists being a proxy for penis size.

  121. darby

      That’s valid. I agree that speeding up the editorial process could diminish quality, or atleast make it less consistent. It could create situations where start-up journals will snatch up names without reading anything. Also, I don’t if, within the hypothetical, we are giving the option to turn down offers to publish to submitors. I suppose not for this to be a more pure example of Socialism, but that pushes the hypothetical more toward unreality. Anyway.

  122. darby

      That’s valid. I agree that speeding up the editorial process could diminish quality, or atleast make it less consistent. It could create situations where start-up journals will snatch up names without reading anything. Also, I don’t if, within the hypothetical, we are giving the option to turn down offers to publish to submitors. I suppose not for this to be a more pure example of Socialism, but that pushes the hypothetical more toward unreality. Anyway.

  123. JosephScapellato

      Right on

  124. JosephScapellato

      Right on

  125. Fucknigga

      Let’s just admit that this metaphor doesn’t work.

  126. Fucknigga

      Let’s just admit that this metaphor doesn’t work.

  127. Jac Jemc

      I submit lots of different places (surprise, surprise) because otherwise I get bored with my blog. Obviously, I can’t love them all equally.

      Mostly I submit to places I really like, but I’ve sent work to magazines just to put feelers out, too, and I usually read at least most of an issue, and if there’s a couple good pieces in there I like, I’ll send work. Even if the work I’m sending might be a little bit of a stretch for a journal, I’ll try it, because usually those are the pieces that excite me in magazines, where you can see that editors let their vision be blown up a little.

      But, in all reality, I like being rejected from places I’m ambivalent about, so sometimes, I know what’s coming back to me when the submission goes out.

      I think this might mean I’m a prostitute who likes it when her john gets up halfway through and says, ‘Eh, I’m not feelin’ it.’

      Then I go rub one off on my blog.

      Sleeplessness apparently makes me dirty.

  128. Jac Jemc

      I submit lots of different places (surprise, surprise) because otherwise I get bored with my blog. Obviously, I can’t love them all equally.

      Mostly I submit to places I really like, but I’ve sent work to magazines just to put feelers out, too, and I usually read at least most of an issue, and if there’s a couple good pieces in there I like, I’ll send work. Even if the work I’m sending might be a little bit of a stretch for a journal, I’ll try it, because usually those are the pieces that excite me in magazines, where you can see that editors let their vision be blown up a little.

      But, in all reality, I like being rejected from places I’m ambivalent about, so sometimes, I know what’s coming back to me when the submission goes out.

      I think this might mean I’m a prostitute who likes it when her john gets up halfway through and says, ‘Eh, I’m not feelin’ it.’

      Then I go rub one off on my blog.

      Sleeplessness apparently makes me dirty.

  129. Amber

      And some, like Hustler, have both.

  130. Amber

      And some, like Hustler, have both.

  131. Clapper

      I totally don’t buy this. I’ve heard it before, and I think it’s bullshit. How many writers (wannabe or otherwise) here on the Giant don’t buy books? How many writers (wannabe or otherwise) off the Giant don’t buy books? I don’t know a single person who fancies him/herself a writer who doesn’t read books. But I do know a shitload of non-writers who read a ton of books.

      Virtually every writer is a reader. It’s almost 1:1. Any non-writing readers beyond that make the ratio of readers to writers way, way higher than 1:1.

      Now whether or not the readers are reading anything GOOD… well, that’s something else.

  132. Clapper

      I totally don’t buy this. I’ve heard it before, and I think it’s bullshit. How many writers (wannabe or otherwise) here on the Giant don’t buy books? How many writers (wannabe or otherwise) off the Giant don’t buy books? I don’t know a single person who fancies him/herself a writer who doesn’t read books. But I do know a shitload of non-writers who read a ton of books.

      Virtually every writer is a reader. It’s almost 1:1. Any non-writing readers beyond that make the ratio of readers to writers way, way higher than 1:1.

      Now whether or not the readers are reading anything GOOD… well, that’s something else.

  133. Blake Butler

      i’d like to agree with you dave, but i’ve met so many who are even Proud to not buy much of anything.

  134. Blake Butler

      i’d like to agree with you dave, but i’ve met so many who are even Proud to not buy much of anything.

  135. Clapper

      Seriously? People who consider themselves writers? DO they actually write? Or do they pretend to write so they can be hip somehow? Seems to me that the only folks I’ve known who considered themselves artists in whatever field who also claimed not to consume any of the art in their field were not only too lazy to consume, they were too lazy to create. It was purely image.

      And aren’t they exposed in any conversation in about two seconds flat? Art is, to some degree, communal. Or at least communicative. People who communicate only one direction pretty quickly get ignored.

  136. Clapper

      Seriously? People who consider themselves writers? DO they actually write? Or do they pretend to write so they can be hip somehow? Seems to me that the only folks I’ve known who considered themselves artists in whatever field who also claimed not to consume any of the art in their field were not only too lazy to consume, they were too lazy to create. It was purely image.

      And aren’t they exposed in any conversation in about two seconds flat? Art is, to some degree, communal. Or at least communicative. People who communicate only one direction pretty quickly get ignored.

  137. jereme

      i want to agree with Dave too but I can’t. What he is saying is true but not applicable here.

      Fuck buying books/magazines. How about putting forth effort just to win free shit.

      People are dumb. Artists are dumber.

      Most artists are too involved with their own ego jelqing to care about what others are doing.

  138. jereme

      i want to agree with Dave too but I can’t. What he is saying is true but not applicable here.

      Fuck buying books/magazines. How about putting forth effort just to win free shit.

      People are dumb. Artists are dumber.

      Most artists are too involved with their own ego jelqing to care about what others are doing.

  139. david erlewine

      well, that’s weird. i’d be curious to hear about writers who feel proud/good about not buying books. hopefully they will speak. blake, w/o giving anything up on them, can you say anything else? You mean they talk to you openly about not “needing” to buy books?

      i’m curious what you all think about the fact that so much content is available online for free. There are so many journals with online content that some months I can’t keep up w/ them, let alone my JMWW reading, etc.

      I just bought Stephen Dixon’s INTERSTATE on amazon, used, for 1 cent plus shipping. i paid 45 cents for Ray plus shipping. I’m getting some stuff, but i’m curious about writers “happy”/proud not to buy any books.

  140. david erlewine

      well, that’s weird. i’d be curious to hear about writers who feel proud/good about not buying books. hopefully they will speak. blake, w/o giving anything up on them, can you say anything else? You mean they talk to you openly about not “needing” to buy books?

      i’m curious what you all think about the fact that so much content is available online for free. There are so many journals with online content that some months I can’t keep up w/ them, let alone my JMWW reading, etc.

      I just bought Stephen Dixon’s INTERSTATE on amazon, used, for 1 cent plus shipping. i paid 45 cents for Ray plus shipping. I’m getting some stuff, but i’m curious about writers “happy”/proud not to buy any books.

  141. anyreads

      thought i answered this when you first asked.

      of course its money, first of all, of course. second well most mags aren’t worth looking at no not atall so if you want your own stuffs out there you of course inevitably will be giving it to ones that you dont like.

      thats how its always been btw

  142. david erlewine

      so i guess my muddled point is do you feel negatively towards “writers” who for a variety of reasons may primarily read online versus print journals? i’m sort of embarrassed putting that out there on this place b/c to be honest i make an okay income and, objectively, can afford more than some on here. i just made some lifestyle choices (houses, cars, kids, etc) when I wasn’t writing for years…that i now have to operate under.

      i truly feel like shit when writers whose work i love and (who i like personally as writers/”friends”) have chaps come out and i don’t buy them quickly. maybe that’s the jewish guilt in me, i dunno. my wife is not a fan of my suggestion to buy fewer diapers and more books.

  143. anyreads

      thought i answered this when you first asked.

      of course its money, first of all, of course. second well most mags aren’t worth looking at no not atall so if you want your own stuffs out there you of course inevitably will be giving it to ones that you dont like.

      thats how its always been btw

  144. david erlewine

      so i guess my muddled point is do you feel negatively towards “writers” who for a variety of reasons may primarily read online versus print journals? i’m sort of embarrassed putting that out there on this place b/c to be honest i make an okay income and, objectively, can afford more than some on here. i just made some lifestyle choices (houses, cars, kids, etc) when I wasn’t writing for years…that i now have to operate under.

      i truly feel like shit when writers whose work i love and (who i like personally as writers/”friends”) have chaps come out and i don’t buy them quickly. maybe that’s the jewish guilt in me, i dunno. my wife is not a fan of my suggestion to buy fewer diapers and more books.

  145. david erlewine

      you do our name far prouder than i

  146. anyreads

      but dont nobody ever speak out gainst the backbone of every mfa program in this country nope

  147. david erlewine

      you do our name far prouder than i

  148. anyreads

      but dont nobody ever speak out gainst the backbone of every mfa program in this country nope

  149. david erlewine

      love ya even more now, Jac, that was a killer post (and I know how some on here feel about the adjective “killer” but it fits here)

  150. david erlewine

      love ya even more now, Jac, that was a killer post (and I know how some on here feel about the adjective “killer” but it fits here)

  151. anyreads

      the whole line is stupid to the max.

      not everybody does every thing in the workday out of total love for the client/customer/bossman/whateva

      so i may hate site x, but they pay $xxxx so i submit to them

      its that friggin simple

      not all of us are mfa grad college writing instructors you know

  152. anyreads

      the whole line is stupid to the max.

      not everybody does every thing in the workday out of total love for the client/customer/bossman/whateva

      so i may hate site x, but they pay $xxxx so i submit to them

      its that friggin simple

      not all of us are mfa grad college writing instructors you know

  153. Clapper

      Can you help me out with this, Jereme?

      “What he is saying is true but not applicable here.”

      I don’t understand this…

  154. Clapper

      Can you help me out with this, Jereme?

      “What he is saying is true but not applicable here.”

      I don’t understand this…

  155. jereme

      Suuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuure David, no problemo.

      what i am saying is you make very valid points about the people calling themselves “artists” or “writers”. I emphatically concur with your opinion.

      But it doesn’t apply here because the people implied do not fall into that category.

      Obviously some event occurred that initiated this conversation of dissatisfaction but naming specifics is not the political thing to do.

      Being honest and direct is not a positive trait in a community setting.

      So i am reading between the lines of Blake’s post and don’t think the topic of this conversation applies to the type of people you are specifying.

      make sense?

  156. jereme

      Suuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuure David, no problemo.

      what i am saying is you make very valid points about the people calling themselves “artists” or “writers”. I emphatically concur with your opinion.

      But it doesn’t apply here because the people implied do not fall into that category.

      Obviously some event occurred that initiated this conversation of dissatisfaction but naming specifics is not the political thing to do.

      Being honest and direct is not a positive trait in a community setting.

      So i am reading between the lines of Blake’s post and don’t think the topic of this conversation applies to the type of people you are specifying.

      make sense?

  157. Clapper

      Gotcha. Thanks.

  158. Clapper

      Gotcha. Thanks.