Six Questions for Zak Block, Editor, The Squawk Back

We're essentially open to all styles and genre... generally disinclined to publish what some might describe as straightforward 'genre' pieces though I hate this term it's useful, I suppose: a piece of writing that relies too heavily on the tropes of a genre I hate, when it's much more judicious to submit pieces of  writing that rely too heavily on the tropes of genres I like. But this raises another interesting question which is, why would I publish something like "The Love Swarm" by Tim Schumacher, which is pretty much straightforward dystopian sci-fi, but then ignore another submission perhaps undertaking humanistic themes in the style of literary fiction...The reason is that in addition to feeling that that piece is one of the best things we've ever published, I think it has more to say about the human condition than a lot of 'literary'-seeming short stories I've read. Which all sounds like a circumlocutious way of saying 'we like things that are good'--so it pretty much boils down to: we like good bad things and bad good things.

(Ceased publication)

SQF: What are the top three things you look for in a submission and why?

ZB: 1) If they're good, 2) if they're good and 3) if they're good. First either one of my assistants or I will check to see if it's  good, then I'll deliberate its goodness for a longer period of time, and finally I'll agree, with myself, that it's  good. I also consider attributes like: 'absolute genius,' 'boundless innovation,' 'blistering incisiveness' and 'staggering insight.'

SQF: What are the top three reasons a submission is rejected, other than not fitting into your answers to the above question and why?

ZB: That's a deceptively simple question... ideally the first reason would be that we like it but also can find no reason not to like it, and somehow feel confident that we'll like it in the future--obviously since we can't know this, and we're often wrong, and we're also a weekly, there's a large variable for regretted decisions; and we can't simply base it off of gut instinct: I think you can read something and convince yourself it's not terrible depending on whatever mood you happen to be in. Personally I know my tastes in literature are broad and mutable: I could be reading Alain-Fournier and then stumble upon a submission somehow reminiscent of that style, publish it and  then only discover my error several weeks later. Considering all of this, often the second reason for rejecting or not rejecting a piece is if a quorum of editors in collaboration with myself agree to it being publishable or not; and then of course I'll publish virtually anything from someone who might be able to help me in my career.

SQF: Which of the following statements is true and why? Plot is more important than character. Character is more important than plot. Plot and character are equally important. 

ZB: I'm not sure. Either they're equally important or not important at all; sometimes you come across a great piece of writing where neither figures significantly. I'm very much a proponent of that there aren't any rules for writing, even if there are "laws": the latter being few, such as, it must be coherent--then again that might be debatable as well because many authors have played with this idea and often incoherence is employed as a narrative device--whereas rules, like the kind we're taught in High School English classes, of minor round, flat major, rising and falling actions and all of that sort of thing aren't really all that useful or even tenable. That isn't to say that a given piece might not be weak of character or weak of plot and not appealing to us for that reason...but I suppose each piece has to be judged on its own terms.

SQF: What advice can you offer new authors hoping to publish their first submission?

ZB: Well, in terms of the 'practical,' I'll say: it's very important to be sure the piece is DONE before you submit, because there's nothing more annoying than receiving revisions, upon the original submission, after we've edited, proofread, chopped and screwed it up. That might be a general piece of advice, but it's especially true of us because I don't think we've ever not changed at least one or two things about a piece before publishing it. Which raises another issue: it's important to be flexible and not adopt an obstinate and pigheaded position on 'changing a single word' of your writing--this happened recently with one of our publications--and bear in mind that most changes or omissions applied to your piece by the editor of a publication with a specific vision, taste, aesthetic uniformity, what have you, isn't trying to suppress your revolutionary ideas but is simply helping to trim from  your piece the fat that would make it otherwise unappealing to him or her/his or her audience, etc. Of course you believe every word of your piece is god's own decree, but I charge you to find me one loving mother who'll concede that her child is a bit ugly and could use some airbrushing.

SQF: Based on your experience as an editor, what have you learned about writing?

ZB: If you're asking what I've learned as a writer, I suppose it's to be open to criticism, or open to rejection as a form of criticism. Obviously to be a writer you have to be solipsistic to a certain degree, but it doesn't pay to be closed off to the idea that you've had a poor idea, or written something which could be improved, etc. Also I've come to appreciate the importance of editing and, though it is a cliche, I feel now more than ever that writing is re-writing; and there might be some vague romantic notion of William Faulkner spilling out As I Lay Dying in six weeks without changing a single word of it, but we all can't be god I suppose.

SQF: What one question on this topic do you wish I'd asked that I didn't? And how would you answer it?

ZB: I like to be asked how I'm feeling, and the answer is usually 'awful.'

Thank you, Zak. We all appreciate you taking time from your busy schedule to participate in this project.

NEXT POST: 12/3--Six Questions for Michelle Elvy and John Wentworth Chapin, Editors, A Baker's Dozen: Thirteen Extraordinary Things

Six Questions for Emily Smith-Miller, Head Editor, The Carnage Conservatory

The Carnage Conservatory publishes short stories, flash fiction, poetry, artwork and photography in the horror genre.

(Ceased publication)

SQF: What are the top three things you look for in a submission and why?

ES-M: Creativity, vivid language, and the ability to get a physical reaction from me, be it nausea or chills, I like to be affected in some spine tingling way.

SQF: What are the top three reasons a submission is rejected, other than not fitting into your answers to the above question and why?

ES-M: Cliche subject matter, poor dialogue and uninteresting characters, plot holes. But please always check spelling and grammar, I can forgive the little things, it's just nice if you don't have an extreme amount of typos, I like to feel like you actually read your piece before submitting it.

SQF: Which of the following statements is true and why? Plot is more important than character. Character is more important than plot. Plot and character are equally important.

ES-M: Plot and character are equally important. You can have a great plot, but if your characters are weak then I'm not invested in them enough to care and vice versa. I need something to be moving my characters if they're interesting, especially when it comes to writing horror.

SQF: What advice can you offer new authors hoping to publish their first submission?

ES-M: Duotrope is great for finding new magazines that fit with your writing. When you find publications that you would like to submit your writing to, do a little research, visit the site, read the work that is already there so that you can get a feel for the kind of writing the editors are looking for. Submit as often as possible and do not take rejection harshly, only look for a chance to improve, not everyone will love everything you write.

SQF: Based on your experience as an editor, what have you learned about writing?

ES-M: Have fun with writing, and proofread. Writing is a gift, and those of us who are fortunate enough to even be in the game know how cruel and arduous that game can be, but you can't let the critics beat you. Just because one editor doesn't like your work doesn't mean it's the end of your career as a writer. And never compare yourself to others, they have a different voice, a different style, they are not you. I've read pieces of writing that I felt unfit to judge because they were so good, but then I realized that I could not compare myself to the many talented individuals out there. Being an editor is a humbling experience and one I'm very pleased to have.

SQF: What one question on this topic do you wish I'd asked that I didn't? And how would you answer it?

ES-M: Why did I start my website? The answer is fun and simple: I started The Carnage Conservatory because I wanted a publication that was tailor made for the kind of writing I wanted to do. I could not find a publication that I felt was open enough to accept what I was creating. I spoke with other writers and I realized that they had similar problems with the guidelines imposed by some of the more well know publications. So, I made my own magazine and I've met some of the most talented amazing people through the site. I'm grateful for all the support and fantastic work that they're doing. I have the most fun with Carnage, it's a great experience and the perfect first endeavor in being an editor.

 Thank you, Emily. We all appreciate you taking time from your busy schedule to participate in this project.

NEXT POST: 11/30--Six Questions for Zak Block, Editor, The Squawk Back

Six Questions for Tom Vater, Publisher, Crime Wave Press

As of 10/21/13: "Crime Wave Press is now open to reading manuscripts from all other exotic locations around the world and will no longer publish only Asian-based crime fiction."

(ceased publication)

Founded in 2012 with acclaimed publisher Hans Kemp of Visionary World, Crime Wave Press publishes a range of crime fiction - from whodunits to Noir and Hardboiled, from historical mysteries to espionage thrillers, from literary crime to pulp fiction, from highly commercial page turners to marginal texts exploring Asia’s dark underbelly. 

SQF: Crime Wave Press is a new venture. What does the company offer authors that other presses don't?

TV: Crime Wave Press is the only crime fiction imprint in Asia. We offer a niche in a crowded market and we have the necessary know-how. Co-founder Hans Kemp has more than a decade experience as a successful publisher working in Asia, while I have worked in the region as a writer for 15 years. As such we bring great business and editorial skills to the table. We both have a passion for good crime fiction, and we can offer a more personal and knowledgeable service than larger publishers might. 

Countless writers self publish these days and some have asked us what we can provide that they can’t do themselves. Generally, I find that writers want to write. And if they are good at it, they might not be as good at designing a cover, editing, getting distribution, selling rights and generating PR. Crime Wave Press does all those things. Of course we can’t compete with the financial muscle behind large publishing houses but we provide a platform for professional writers so that they can get on with what they presumably do best, which is to write more books. 

SQF: What are the top three things you look for in a manuscript?

TV: Apart from great stories, riveting, original plots and unique voices? We look for a wide range of crime fiction - from whodunits to Noir and Hardboiled, from historical mysteries to espionage thrillers, from literary crime to pulp fiction, from highly commercial page turners to marginal texts exploring Asia’s dark underbelly. 

The manuscripts we seek have to be almost print ready. That means they have to be professionally written and more or less edited. Furthermore, the story has to touch us in some way, and we have to be reasonably sure that we can sell the book to our target audience.

SQF: What will turn you off to a manuscript?

TV: We get turned off when authors don’t follow the straightforward submission guidelines posted on our website. Crime Fiction is often political – Chester Himes and James Elroy are great examples of writers with political agendas. We get turned off by crime fiction that is overtly right wing. This could be construed as a strong political stance on our part, but it really is not. Though it does hopefully indicate that we truly care about what we publish and that this goes beyond commercial considerations.

SQF: How many books do you plan to publish in a year?

TV: We plan to publish ten titles in this coming year IF we find enough good material. Our third title – Dead Sea, a thriller set in the Philippines - will be on the market in late September. But we do not have a rigid publishing schedule. We are very careful in our selection process. It is too early to tell what percentage of received manuscripts we end up publishing, but judging by early submissions, it’s unlikely to be more than one in ten. 

SQF: What is your advice to new, unpublished authors looking for a publisher?

TV: It’s a long road to getting a crime novel published. Learning to write is a bit like learning a language. It’s a skill.  Practice all the time. Write a thousand words a day, every day. Or more. Write in different disciplines. Write articles or travelogues or screenplays or cook books as well as fiction. If, after some years of training, you have mastered the skill and have a story to tell, then sit down and write it as best as you see fit. Then try to sell it. That could take time (it took me almost 5 years to get my first novel published). And don’t expect to get rich or even to be able to make a living overnight. The competition is immense. I have published some 15 books. Some of them sold well, others hardly at all. I make a living from my craft but I know very few other people who are as obsessive about writing as I am. It’s really a lifetime commitment. 

SQF: What question do you wish I’d asked that I didn’t? And how would you answer it?

TV:

Question: eBooks versus print? Where does Crime Wave Press stand?

Answer: All the titles we sign are published as eBooks. We decide on a case by case basis in what other formats any signed title might be published. Our second book The Cambodian Book of the Dead has just been released as a POD (print on demand). We are also considering a POD for our first title, The Devil’s Road to Kathmandu, though a foreign language eBook and print edition which we have just negotiated is likely to beat us to it. Crime Wave Press feels that this flexibility in selecting publication formats will allow us and our authors to get the most out of a challenging and highly competitive market.

Thank you, Tom. We all appreciate you taking time from your busy schedule to participate in this project.

NEXT POST: 11/30--Six Questions for Emily Smith-Miller, Head Editor, The Carnage Conservatory

Six Questions for Troy Palmer, Editor, Little Fiction

Little Fiction publishes literary short stories that are digital, portable, and free. Read the complete guidelines here.

SQF: Why did you start this magazine?

TP: I dipped a toe into indie (pseudo-self) publishing in the mid-90s and had been looking for a way back in that made sense in our digital times. The world of short stories felt like a good fit and Little Fiction seemed like a way to offer something a bit different. To that end, I wouldn't consider us a magazine, though we do publish monthly. Our stories are released, intended and designed to stand on their own.


SQF: What are the top three things you look for in a submission and why?

TP: Conflict, character and a reason to care about what's happening to the people in the story. Because that's what storytelling is.


SQF: What common mistakes do you encounter that turn you off to a submission?

TP: Lack of detail, and characters that we don't know enough about. I see a fair number of submissions where it feels like the writer knows what's going on, but they haven't given enough to the reader. Providing enough (without too much) detail in a short story isn’t easy.


SQF: Do you provide comments when you reject a submission?

TP: Almost always. The process of submitting stories isn’t just about getting published; it's about trying to become a better writer, as well. It's also a lot for writers to open their work — and themselves — up to rejection; I figure they deserve something of value in return. Of course, there are still times when all I can offer is that the story just isn't right for Little Fiction.


SQF: Based on your experience as an editor, what have you learned about writing?

TP: That you need to keep doing it, first and foremost. But also that you need to really immerse yourself in the works that you love. It's not about reading more; it's about looking closely at the craft. Notice the subtleties, the things you as a reader connected with, and you'll begin to notice what might be missing from your writing. The craft is the details.


SQF: What do you want authors to know about the submissions you reject and how authors should respond? Along this same idea, do you mind if authors reply with polite questions about the comments they receive?

TP: I don't mind at all if authors reply with questions, and I'll do my best to help them out. As for how they should respond... they should just keep going. Keep writing. Keep learning. Keep trying.


SQF: What one question on this topic do you wish I'd asked that I didn't? And how would you answer it?

TP: I'm not sure what the question would be, but a last piece of advice is to target your submissions. Know where you're sending your work and only send stuff to places where a) you think your story will be a good fit and b) where you want your work to appear. Don't just submit your work anywhere. You'll get better results that way, even if your story gets rejected.

Oh, and if you can, share your stories with someone who isn't afraid to be tough and honest with you before you start submitting them.

Thank you, Troy. We all appreciate you taking time from your busy schedule to participate in this project.

NEXT POST: 11/23--Six Questions for Tom Vater, Publisher, Crime Wave Press

Six Questions for Jenny Catlin, Founder/Editor-in-Chief, Scissors and Spackle

The Scissors and Spackle editors "are excited by unconventional writing and encourage submitters to send us work that defies conventional classification." Read the complete guidelines here.

SQF: What are the top three things you look for in a submission and why?

JC: Originality. We receive a large number of submissions that are well written but don’t possess any unique qualities. We aim to publish fresh material that may not easily fit in to traditional journals. We want subject matter and syntax that we haven’t read before. If someone is sending in a poem about being drunk and heart broken it better be damn good, totally unique, or signed Tom Waits.

Painstakingly proof read material. Though we now have one on staff, I am not a copy editor. If a submission is accepted with grammatical errors, there is a strong possibility that it will be published with them. That makes the writer look bad. That makes us look bad. I sometimes believe that there is a small army of previously rejected writers that take tremendous joy in finding editorial errors in our site, and I do not wish to provide them fodder. We are a horribly understaffed publication and because my focus is on the content and quality of the work, I don’t always have time to search for miss-used semi colons. In addition, the care that a writer takes in proofreading their work speaks volumes about the seriousness of the writer.

I am not sure there is a third. If someone sends in a unique, clean piece there is a good chance it will be accepted. We are often not sure what we are looking for until we read it.

SQF: What are the top three reasons a submission is rejected, other than not fitting into your answers to the above question and why?

JC: Anything that is pointlessly demoralizing to a population is always rejected. We print adult material but will never run a story about a geeky science chick who is a maniac in bed, defying the notion that intelligent women are ugly and gross. No homophobic/racist (etc.) rants.

If I am on the fence about a submission, a poorly conceived cover letter is sure to inspire rejection. People might be surprised at how many cover letters are downright insulting. I have read a number of cover letters that say something to the effect of “I believe my work is leaps and bounds better that what I have read on your site.” Which always baffles me--why would anyone want to be published along side what they believe to be, a bunch of crappy poets?

Anything written from a pet’s perspective. This is a personal pet (pun intended) peeve of mine. That kind of feel-goody, “Art of Racing in the Rain,” writing makes my skin crawl. Though no knock on the people who write it. We all have different interests.  

SQF: Which of the following statements is true and why? Plot is more important than character. Character is more important than plot. Plot and character are equally important.

JC: Both and neither. The quality and content of the words is all that I care about. The plot and characters can be very surreal and undefined; if the writing is a fantastic, visceral experience I will fall in love with it.  

SQF: What advice can you offer new authors hoping to publish their first submission?

JC: Keep submitting. I offer this advice from the perspective of both a writer and a publisher. I reject great work, simply because it doesn’t suit us specifically. And I like to think that I have had great work rejected for the same reason. 

Also, know your markets. Every editor, of every publication, will suggest that submitters read an issue or two before sending their work. They do this for a reason. Writers should have a sense of a publication’s aesthetic before they send their work in. Not every great poem/story is a fit for every great publication. 

SQF: Based on your experience as an editor, what have you learned about writing?

JC: I’ve learned more about writing through editing Scissors and Spackle than I have in any other venue. There is an abundance of incredibly talented writers in the world. Reading through submissions, I have realized that I need to hone my craft to stand out amongst them. However, I think that the most important thing that I have learned, and tried to apply to my own work, is to write from a reader’s perspective. That is to say that just because something is interesting to me, does not mean that it is of interest to anyone else. In the long-long ago days, I wrote a lot of ‘my sad bar life’ poetry. As an editor, I have read a ton of it as well. I now know that that is generally the most insipid, boring crap on earth to read. It was a hard realization for me to internalize. I have had all these experiences that I believe to be harrowing and awe-inspiring but they just don’t come through on the paper. Many things that I, at one time, believed to be my own totally unique, personal stories pretty much belong to everyone else already. 

Unfortunately, I am not one of those writers that can make the old new again. To be honest I don’t think that there are many. Truly great writing capitalizes on the mundane moments in life, not on the grand ones. If a writer can create a whole tragic landscape around picking up a fork from the floor, there is your genius. Anyone can make teenage prostitutes and junkies sad, it’s in the manual.   

SQF: What one question on this topic do you wish I'd asked that I didn't? And how would you answer it?

JC:

Q: When an editor asks for a brief third person bio, what are they really asking for?

A: A BRIEF third person bio. I appreciate that writers want to trumpet their previous accomplishments, but trophy case bios are not necessary. Include something interesting about yourself and a few links to your work. If readers want to find out more about you, they will. A full page explanation of every single journal that you have ever been published in is neither BRIEF nor appealing. BRIEF, in my opinion, refers to a quick note no longer than three or four sentences.  

Thank you, Jenny. We all appreciate you taking time from your busy schedule to participate in this project.

NEXT POST: 11/20--Six Questions for Troy Palmer, Editor, Little Fiction

Six Questions for Douglas Pinson, Editor and Publisher, Spinozablue

Spinozablue publishes fic­tion, poetry, art, music, short films, pho­tog­ra­phy, non-​​fiction essays and reviews.  Read the complete guidelines here.

SQF: Why did you start this magazine?

DP: I thought it was the fastest possible way to become a billionaire. Isn't that why everyone starts an online Literary Arts Journal?

All seriousness aside, the original impetus was a combination of many things. Centuries ago, I was an editor for Calvert, an arts journal for the University of Maryland, and I enjoyed that experience immensely. Except for the part when I became homeless and had to sleep in the Calvert office, eat day-old yogurt and dodge the Authorities. But that's another story entirely . . . 

Many years later, after finding a new home, I looked around me and said: Wow! There is an absolute lack of literary journals being run solely and completely by me! I must fill the void!! So, the original plan was to create Spinozablue, publish the best art, fiction, poetry, photography and film possible, and throw in a work or two meself. I was also hoping that a certain circle of ne'er do wells from the old New York Times book forums would keep me supplied with deathless prose for generations. Alas, that was not to be. But we soldier on, regardless. 

SQF: What are the top three things you look for in a submission and why?

DP:

1. Can they hit a curve ball? 

2. Can they parallel park?

3. Do they realize that every time they say "center around," an out-of-work theosophist gets a job?

Of course, the first is self-explanatory. The second is essential, given the relentless tight squeezes of modern life. And the third? While I love Zen koans, I'm just not prepared to wrack my brain over stuff that would make Einstein kvetch to his relatives. 

SQF: What common mistakes do you encounter that turn you off to a submission?

DP: Good question. So, okay. Time for a little shift in tone here. Common mistakes? This is really more about my personal biases than an actual "mistake," per se. But, really, folks, rhymes? You actually want to write poetry with rhymes, still? In 2012? After thousands of poets gave their lives, echoing the storied words of Braveheart, just so you wouldn't have to labor endlessly to locate matching sounds that distract everyone from what you're trying to express in the first place? You still want to write poems that rhyme?!?!

SQF: Do you provide comments when you reject a submission?

DP: I do at times, and it's never an easy thing for me. Especially when they attach a photo of their latest bear kill. 

SQF: Based on your experience as an editor, what have you learned about writing?

DP: That's easy. We writers are terrible editors of our own work. But we tend to be pretty good editors of the work of others. Back in the 80s, I went through a phase where I read voraciously about "theory," especially PoMod. I read Derrida, Foucault, Lacan, Eco, Kristeva, Hassan, Barthes, Levi Strauss, etc. I read the Obstructionists and the Decongestants. All those guys, you know? But after awhile, I came to the conclusion that all of that theory got in the way of my connection with the actual work. So I returned to people who love the literature itself. Other writers. Other poets. Other novelists. IMO, they write the best about writing. 

SQF: What do you want authors to know about the submissions you reject and how authors should respond? Along this same idea, do you mind if authors reply with polite questions about the comments they receive?

DP: I want them to know that it really is difficult to say no. It kills me softly each time I have to say no to Roberta Flack, for instance. I start out not wanting to say no, ever. So that when I say it, it's because of the divine right of kings bestowed upon me by generations of delusional grandeur. 

Oh, and yes. Certainly. I want writers to reply with more and more questions. Sure. Of course. 

SQF: What one question on this topic do you wish I'd asked that I didn't? And how would you answer it?

DP: To be honest, I wish you had asked me about the obvious decline in genuine empathy, moral imagination and compassion toward other human beings and the planet. I wish you had asked me if I thought this was somehow related to the dumbing down of culture and the virtual disappearance of long, focused, concentrated encounters with great works of art. I truly wish you had bothered to address the issue of the callousness of modern life and our me mine me mine obsessions. And I would have answered with less than a sneer, but more than a whatever, "Get a life!!"

 Thank you, Douglas. We all appreciate you taking time from your busy schedule to participate in this project.

NEXT POST: 11/16--Six Questions for Jenny Catlin, Founder/Editor-in-Chief, Scissors and Spackle

Six Questions for Michael S. O'Connor, Editor, Primalzine

Primalzine is an online publication showcasing trauma-based fiction, poetry, and artwork.

(Ceased publication)

SQF: What are the top three things you look for in a submission and why?

MO: First, every story has to have something going for it. At least one thing, preferably more than one thing, but it’s that thing that makes you forget that you are reading it and makes you remember that you read it long after you finished reading it.

In other words, it is the thing that grabs you or touches you or punches you in the stomach with an emotional wallop. Or makes you laugh or whatever. These are the qualities that I look for in a submission.

Second, every story must be connected to the theme or subject matter of Primalzine. My guidelines explicitly state what Primalzine is looking for, material that deals with the concept of trauma in some way. I think this can encompass a wide range of fiction, but sometimes it does not, and I do get submissions that have nothing to do with the subject matter. Those, no matter how good they may be, tend to be rejected.

All writers need to research the markets that they want to submit to. Read the magazine. Follow the submission guidelines. This is just common sense. Yet, so many don’t.

And third, every story should be an easy edit. Since Primalzine has become a one-man operation, and because the actual editing is the most labor intensive and time consuming part of the process of putting out a magazine, I tend to favor work that has been well edited already. Putting out a magazine is a labor of love for me, but please forgive me for wanting to reduce the labor part of it as much as possible.

I’m only being honest here.

SQF: What common mistakes do you encounter that turn you off to a submission?

MO: Well, besides the lack of the aforementioned qualities, many of the submissions that I reject are simply sloppy presentations of half-realized stories. My acceptance rate is probably a little better than most, but at just under ten percent, the odds are still against you. To me, it’s just common sense--there’s that phrase again--to present your work in as finished and polished a state as possible and in a format that is clear and easy to read. If the submission is too much of a chore for me to read and evaluate, I am not likely to accept it. Almost without exception, the stories that I accept are the ones that look professionally presented.

The same applies to half-realized stories. Writing is rewriting, right? I have received too many submissions that read like first or second drafts. Primalzine and most other literary magazines are not workshops, so please send only work that you honestly believe is ready for publication. Or at least, almost ready.

SQF: Do you provide comments when you reject a submission?

MO: Almost never. However, if I have enough interest in a story, and I think that the story is almost ready--and again, I want to stress almost ready--I may provide a suggestion or two that if followed, may persuade me to accept the submission. The writer obviously has the choice of following my suggestions or not.

SQF: Will you publish a submission an author posted on a personal blog? 

MO: Technically, if something is posted on a blog, it is considered published. I’m not normally interested in reprints, but in the case of something posted only on a personal blog, I may bend that rule, provided that I really really like the story.

SQF: What do you want authors to know about the stories you reject and how authors should respond? Along this same idea, do you mind if authors reply with polite questions about the comments they receive?

MO: I’m not saying anything new when I say that writing is a tough business, and it is at least twice as tough for writers of fiction. We all need to get used to rejection. It’s not personal. Stories are rejected for any number of reasons, some of which I have explained, but submitting stories for submission is still part crap shoot, a matter of getting it to the right person at the right time. Just because I rejected a submission doesn’t mean that another editor will do the same. So if you honestly believe that your story is ready for publication, simply keep trying. Still, make sure that it is as good as it can be before you submit it anywhere.

Personally, I don’t expect responses from authors whose stories I have rejected, but I occasionally I get some. A few have been rather snotty. One guy told me that it was obvious to him that I just didn’t “understand” his brilliant piece of work, and this was evidenced by him telling me that his story was just accepted by another magazine, apparently one more insightful than mine, according to him anyhow. He didn’t say which magazine it was, but I thought, hey, good for you anyhow. 

Maybe I thought Asshole, too. Good for you, Asshole. See, editors need thick skins, too.

Having said all that, if a writer asks politely about why I rejected his or her submission, I’ll do my best to respond constructively.

SQF: What one question on this topic do you wish I'd asked that I didn't? And how would you answer it?

Hmm. How about this one?

Do I pay a lot of attention to a writer’s publishing credits when considering a submission for publication?

In a word, yes. I ask for them, and I will check and see where they have work published even if they don’t include them. Some people have sent me lengthy lists of publishing credits with their submissions, and I do mean lengthy, some of which have included the likes of the Paris Review. On one hand I feel honored that they chose my humble little fledgling magazine to submit to, and if they have a recognized name, they might lift my again humble little fledgling magazine to a new level of acceptance. However, I can’t and won’t guarantee that their submission will be accepted. In my book--er, magazine--it’s the work that gets accepted, not the writer who wrote it.

Still, if someone like Joyce Carol Oates or someone else of similar stature decided to grace my humble little fledgling magazine with their presence, I will be honest and say that I do not know how scrutinizing I will be of their submissions.

Then again, I could say that I rejected Joyce Carol Oates. Hmm. I wonder how she would react to that. Maybe say, who is this asshole?

Anyhow, verifiable publishing credits go a long way to establish a writer’s track record and professionalism. So I do consider them to some extent. But it’s still the work that counts, and an unpublished writer has just as good a chance. And if you do want to say that you were published by the Paris Review, make sure that you have before you tell me. Because I can find out if you have or haven’t. I’m just saying. It has happened before. It is best to keep the fiction in the story.

 Thank you, Michael. We all appreciate you taking time from your busy schedule to participate in this project.

NEXT POST: 11/13--Six Questions for Douglas Pinson, Editor and Publisher, Spinozablue

Six Questions for Laura Shovan, Editor, Little Patuxent Review

Little Patuxent Review is a community-based publication focused on writers and artists from the Mid-Atlantic region, but all excellent work originating in the United States will be considered. LPR publishes fiction, non-fiction and creative non-fiction to 3,500 words, poetry, art and photography. Read the complete guidelines here.

SQF: What are the top three things you look for in a submission and why?

LS: First, I want to be caught up in the world of the story or essay, whatever that may be. By “the world” I mean the emotional world of the characters, as well as the setting. Both should be believable and compelling.

Second, we (each submission is read by at least three people) appreciate clean writing because typos, grammatical errors and inconsistent diction can pull a reader out of the world of the story.

Third, a shift in the protagonist’s interior life is something I look for in a short story. Even a decision not to act can be an important decision for a character.

Our poetry top-three is a strong voice, language that sings (with a tone that suits the poem’s topic), and something for the reader to chew on.

SQF: What are the top three reasons a submission is rejected, other than not fitting into your answers to the above question and why?

LS: Submissions that are over our word/poem limit or from authors outside the U.S. are declined outright. Just as potential contributors expect a thoughtful reading of their work, journals expect authors to read and respect submission guidelines.

Little Patuxent Review has a theme for each issue. Occasionally, we receive several submissions that explore the same topic, e.g. poems about homelessness for our Social Justice issue. Authors can avoid this by sending their best work, but also by looking at the theme from a unique or unusual point of view. Such pieces make an issue of our journal richer.

We usually pass on fiction and poetry that is didactic and/or spells everything out for the reader. Don’t tie it all up with a bow. Give the reader space to engage with your work.

SQF: Which of the following statements is true and why? Plot is more important than character. Character is more important than plot. Plot and character are equally important.

LS: The last is true for us. A writer may come up with a plot first and then develop the characters, or the opposite might be true. By the time the piece reaches LPR’s inbox, these elements should be integrated and balanced.

SQF: What advice can you offer new authors hoping to publish their first submission?

LS: If possible, take your work to a critique group for feedback. Read at least one issue of the journal you are targeting.

SQF: Based on your experience as an editor, what have you learned about writing?

LS: I am still learning from the experience of being an editor. Drafting and revising work can be a solitary process, but polishing and publishing is not. There are people out there – writers, writing groups like our local Maryland Writers Association, editors – who are willing to help their peers and cheer on fellow authors. The best part about being involved with a community-based journal like LPR is the community. Meeting, reading and corresponding with poets and prose writers, I’ve met fascinating people, made good friends, and shared my own work. These are the people who recommend great books, tell me about new journals, and let me know when there is a can’t-miss reading in town.

SQF: What one question on this topic do you wish I'd asked that I didn't? And how would you answer it?

LS: A poet friend sent me an email recently, asking for advice. An editor at another journal wanted to publish one of his poems, but had given him revision notes. He felt unsure. There was a tug between liking the poem as he had written it and wanting to be published. How should a writer handle feedback from an editor?

I told my friend that, as an editor, I am always willing to negotiate with an author whose work I like. If a writer disagrees with suggested changes, I like that person to take the time to explain why. A curt reply (“That’s how I wrote it”) leaves no room for discussing the work. Remember that editors want what you want: the tightest, richest piece of writing possible. Consider their feedback carefully and respond in kind.

Thank you, Laura. We all appreciate you taking time from your busy schedule to participate in this project. 

NEXT POST: 11/9--Six Questions for Michael S. O'Connor, Editor, Primalzine

Six Questions for Jennifer Patterson & Taylor Adams, Editors, Visceral Uterus

Visceral Uterus publishes literary fiction to 1,000 words (but will read works that go a little over) and poetry.

(ceased publication)

SQF: What are the top three things you look for in a submission and why?

VU: Metaphorical (and sometimes literal) guts. We’re hungry for transgressive fiction, gritty realism and relatable angst. We like to think of writing as a purging of negativity as well as fee-free therapy. Give us the dirt of the psyche, the blood-stains of the soul. Give us honesty. Punch us in the heart. We want to be a place where people can share their darker sides with no shame, where secrets can crawl out from the dark and be welcomed by other misfits. 

SQF: What common mistakes do you encounter that turn you off to a submission?

VU: It may seem picky, but a cover letter that doesn’t acknowledge us by name colours a bias on the whole submission. We refer to writers by name and would appreciate the same treatment. Spelling or grammatical errors are a big turn-off, but we are quick to forgive the occasional typo. Smut with no emotional context is likely to send you right to the rejection pile. 

SQF: Do you provide comments when you reject a submission?

VU: Always. We try to be as specific as possible when explaining a rejection, and if we see potential we’ll encourage you to submit again. We’re writers too and can’t stomach the cliche "It wasn’t quite what we were looking for" vagueness.

SQF: Will you publish a submission an author posted on a personal blog?

VU; Sure, why not.

SQF: What do you want authors to know about the stories you reject and how authors should respond? Along this same idea, do you mind if authors reply with polite questions about the comments they receive?

VU: We love to keep communication going with writers. Everyone’s a person here and everyone’s chasing their individual dream. We welcome feedback and will even look over revised submissions if the writers wish to share.

SQF: What one question on this topic do you wish I'd asked that I didn't? And how would you answer it?

VU: What we’re afraid of, because it reminds people we’re not only editors, but humans! : ) Jennifer’s afraid of losing her ability to climax. I’m terrified of waking up to find that I’m not a real person. 

Thank you, Jennifer & Taylor. We all appreciate you taking time from your busy schedule to participate in this project.

NEXT POST: 11/6--Six Questions for Laura Shovan, Editor, Little Patuxent Review