July 20th, 2010 / 2:29 am
Snippets
Snippets
Mike Young—
The Paris Review is unaccepting previously accepted poems, citing change of editorship. Daniel Nester has the scoop.
Wow. I think that’s ridiculous. There are ways to get around fucking people over without sacrificing your “new aesthetic.” Jesus, that’s retarded.
Does The Paris Review pay? And don’t they have some kind of contract they have you sign upon acceptance since it’s a sort of business deal? And if Paris Review can do something like this does it mean that if a journal accepts my work and then later on another journal accepts the same story I can email the first journal and be like “SORRY CHANGE OF PLANS” and it be okay?
They’ve done this before, after Richard Howard left.
i’d do it just to watch writers whine the word ‘acceptance’
heh
I’d like to heat Nester call TPR about this.
Haha, I like the high level of this Kafkaesque absurdity!
Wow. I think that’s ridiculous. There are ways to get around fucking people over without sacrificing your “new aesthetic.” Jesus, that’s retarded.
I guess it’s a question of who the journal answers to, writers or readers. If the journal only answers to readers, tossing out accepted poems is no big deal.
My second thought is make your poems so good nobody would even consider not using them.
Does The Paris Review pay? And don’t they have some kind of contract they have you sign upon acceptance since it’s a sort of business deal? And if Paris Review can do something like this does it mean that if a journal accepts my work and then later on another journal accepts the same story I can email the first journal and be like “SORRY CHANGE OF PLANS” and it be okay?
They’ve done this before, after Richard Howard left.
i’d do it just to watch writers whine the word ‘acceptance’
heh
Yeah, when Dick Howard left and they did this, people applauded. The stuff they chucked was mostly the work of his students.
I’d like to heat Nester call TPR about this.
Haha, I like the high level of this Kafkaesque absurdity!
I guess it’s a question of who the journal answers to, writers or readers. If the journal only answers to readers, tossing out accepted poems is no big deal.
My second thought is make your poems so good nobody would even consider not using them.
I know its unpopular to say but I don’t think this is the end of the world. It’s certainly tacky and classless and I find it so very distasteful but I do think some of the commentary feels a bit… hysterical.
Yeah, when Dick Howard left and they did this, people applauded. The stuff they chucked was mostly the work of his students.
Like Roxane says, not great but not the end of the world. People get non-fiction pieces killed all the time, so having a story or poem killed.
On the one hand, I’d probably implode if a story of mine was accepted then later rejected by the Paris Review. But on the other hand, how is Stein and the new editors supposed to edit a magazine if over a year’s worth of poetry is backlogged? Irresponsible for the former editors to accept that much.
Lots of magazines have kill fees when a piece gets cut. Doubt many poetry places do though…
Also, reading this site it seems that TPR doesn’t make you sign a contract until near publication, so they aren’t reneging on official contracts.
I’d totally rend my garments for a day or two if I was de-accepted from TPR and then, I suspect life would go on. This recently happened to me with the dustup at The Mississippi Review and it was hard (in the first world problem sense) but the editor who accepted my work had a backup plan and life has, indeed, continued.
so having a story or poem killed shouldn’t be seen as so insane, I think is what I meant to say.
Also, to be frank, I suspect the types of poets who have were in line probably aren’t the types who would have their souls destroyed by this. By which I mean, they were probably established poets who have been accepted in TPR before or at least in other great journals and this probably doesn’t affect their lives or careers much. If a new young writer lost out on this though that could be pretty devastating.
I agree with the rejected poet interviewed on Nester’s blog that it would have been better for TPR to publish the de-accepted poems online, or offer that option at least.
I know its unpopular to say but I don’t think this is the end of the world. It’s certainly tacky and classless and I find it so very distasteful but I do think some of the commentary feels a bit… hysterical.
Like Roxane says, not great but not the end of the world. People get non-fiction pieces killed all the time, so having a story or poem killed.
On the one hand, I’d probably implode if a story of mine was accepted then later rejected by the Paris Review. But on the other hand, how is Stein and the new editors supposed to edit a magazine if over a year’s worth of poetry is backlogged? Irresponsible for the former editors to accept that much.
Lots of magazines have kill fees when a piece gets cut. Doubt many poetry places do though…
Also, reading this site it seems that TPR doesn’t make you sign a contract until near publication, so they aren’t reneging on official contracts.
I’d totally rend my garments for a day or two if I was de-accepted from TPR and then, I suspect life would go on. This recently happened to me with the dustup at The Mississippi Review and it was hard (in the first world problem sense) but the editor who accepted my work had a backup plan and life has, indeed, continued.
so having a story or poem killed shouldn’t be seen as so insane, I think is what I meant to say.
Also, to be frank, I suspect the types of poets who have were in line probably aren’t the types who would have their souls destroyed by this. By which I mean, they were probably established poets who have been accepted in TPR before or at least in other great journals and this probably doesn’t affect their lives or careers much. If a new young writer lost out on this though that could be pretty devastating.
I agree with the rejected poet interviewed on Nester’s blog that it would have been better for TPR to publish the de-accepted poems online, or offer that option at least.
Here’s an interesting solution:
http://sincerityinc.blogspot.com/2010/07/note-from-equalizer-editor-michael.html
Here’s an interesting solution:
http://sincerityinc.blogspot.com/2010/07/note-from-equalizer-editor-michael.html