Six Questions for Renee K. Nicholson and Keegan Lester, Editors, Souvenir: a Journal

Souvenir publishes literary fiction (we also publish nonfiction) and poetry and art. 

(Ceased publication)

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

RKN: Top three? That’s tough, because what I look for is maybe more organic than what could be in a list. I read and edit the prose section, including fiction and nonfiction, and I suppose what I most looking for in the stories, whether true or invented, are a strong sense of character, a sense of wonder or surprise, and something so intensely human I can’t help but be pulled in. I’m not sure there’s an order to those, but rather there’s something magical in the mix of them.

KML: Handling the poetry duties, I’m most often searching for poems whose journey is not merely from point a to point b—that is to say that from the first line, the poem is not necessarily spelling out its destination. I’m not looking for surprise or off putting for the sake of surprise, but something human that is well thought out, whose rationale makes me feel something, even if it is off putting. I’m looking for poetry that uses language not in an attempt to impress me or the reader with language, but for the purpose of creating the world that the poem lives in. 

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

RKN: Writers who are too clever—clever at the expense of being real—are definitely a turn off. I like a piece that has clearly been revised, but not to death. There should be something of that original spark that comes through. Sometimes I get really excited to read a piece, where I can tell the writer is having fun with her writing. I know there are a lot of complaints about overly workshopped pieces, but they do tend to have the sense of fun, play, wonder, etc. knocked right out of them. Not every piece needs to be lighthearted, but a well executed piece of this kind can be a rare find. I also love it when a piece devastates me with a raw sadness that can’t be faked. Anything faked or that feels unearned or inauthentic really turns me from a piece. Also, make sure you are following guidelines. Don’t, for instance, send poems to the prose editor. It’s never good to be sloppy.

KML: Follow guidelines! Proof read your work! Would your passive aggressive archenemy be jealous of this submission? If you can’t make your archenemy jealous, it’s probably not ready to go out.   

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

RKN: I hope to provide more comments—even if it’s just to say, hey, try us again. Because I’m not going to say that unless I really do want to see more from an author. Time becomes a restriction, but I also know a small encouragement or piece of feedback can go a long way. And honestly, I’m just one reader/editor. I know what I want for my publication, but that doesn’t make me the arbiter of taste. I also will say that I really want to find great work. I get really excited about finding it in my list of to-dos.

KML: Until our volume gets to the point where I become a hermit, (more of a hermit than I am now) I will probably provide comments. I hate going to wiki rejections and trying to parse between upper tier rejections and personal and standard. Sometimes I just want someone to say: “Hey. Don’t ever let somebody tell you, you can’t do something. Not even me. All right? You got a dream? You gotta protect it. People can’t do something themselves, they want to tell you you can’t do it. You want something? Go get it! Period!”-----That may be our new form rejection. I’m going to go post that to Souvenir’s wiki rejection right this second. 

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

RKN: I keep a blog, and I write with that blog in mind, not sending those pieces to other publications. So, I don’t mind asking people who submit to Souvenir to do the same thing. It’s not that I’m anti-blog, just that it’s a separation I think is healthy and a standard which I also follow.

Of course, include a link to your blog in your bio, so that if we do take your piece, our readers know where to go to read more of your work. That's a GREAT function of a blog.

KML: It depends on the blog. For instance, if that blog is called: “Mark Strand, Richard Siken, John Ashbery, Josh Bell and friends, sharing previously unpublished poems on a Friday night before submitting to Souvenir” then I might consider.  Otherwise, no I do not publish work that is already traceable via the web or that has a paper trail of any sort.  You’re poets---write more!

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?

RKN: Being reasonable and polite goes a long way. I know my name is just another in a long line of editors writing yes or no or try again to writers, but it’s good for writers to remember that I do have a whole life outside reading and editing for Souvenir—a husband, a dog, my wonderful friends, my own writing, my “day job” teaching ballet (I am also a former ballet dancer, and so I split time between writing and dance), avid book reviewing, my book podcast SummerBooks, etc. Of course I love and am deeply committed to Souvenir as well, and so authors that respect how busy and complicated life can get are much appreciated. There are some definite reasons to reply to me. If, say, I tell an author I’d be interested in reading more of her work, and that author wants to know an appropriate time frame—sure, absolutely. If an author doesn’t understand a comment I’ve made, sure, I’m happy to clarify. If an author responds with a thank you for a comment, that’s always nice to hear. I think it’s all about intent and respect. Just like if I responded to someone’s story or essay with “This is terrible, don’t ever darken our doorstep again” would be unprofessional, rude and disrespectful as an editor (and would alienate readers of our publication!), writers should think about what they’re saying, the way they’re saying it, and why they’re saying it.

Also, if a piece is accepted elsewhere, please do let us know right away. We’ll be thrilled for you, and letting us know keeps us on a good professional footing.

KML: On the response: please do not hurt me. I’m a poet too. I break easily. I think I speak for both Renee and I when I say: we deal with rejection on a daily basis, too. Lit journals, potential dancing partners—hugs from my dad—but we’ve learned to deal. I’ve heard horror stories about people who get rejected, arguing via email and then later in bars at AWP and finally in some boxing ring in Reno on Pay Per View. I don’t mind polite questions about comments. But like I said earlier, that all hinges on the volume of submissions we are getting in. Right now it’s manageable. The writer in me wants to be as accommodating to other writers as possible. But once you cross that polite line, I may take it to my personal blog where I publish poems before sending them out, to vent in a most public and didactic way.     

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

RKN: Many writers find it extremely validating to be published. I know I felt that way when I was first published, and I still do, of course. But no one editor, in my opinion, is going to make or break you. So, I guess my question would be “How should a writer handle a rejection?” I know this is basically what this project is all about, and I think it’s good we’re talking about it. As I mentioned above, I was a ballet dancer, and as such I auditioned a lot. Like writing, there were more well-trained dance artists than positions in companies or shows, and the difference between those who got the position or part and those who didn’t became the finest of fine lines. I think often this happens in writing, too, but because the process is different—a dance audition is very present, and you usually hear back much quicker, and sometimes right at the audition—writers might not see that the difference between an accepted piece and a close piece is a similar fine line. So keep sending out. I have writing friends who think sending to five journals is a lot. It’s barely scratching the surface. When you get out and read the journals and get a sense of them, you’ll see there are so many wonderful venues for your work. No one journal is the end-all be-all.

I used to tell a joke about the difference between ballet rejection and writing rejection, in which I said no one ever rejected a story or essay with the caveat that it would be great if I were ten pounds lighter. In writing, the rejections are usually carefully worded and very professional, where sometimes in dance the feedback was very stinging and personal. And really, in either case, I don’t think the point is to hurt anyone’s feelings. In the case of writers, I think we’re all pretty polite about it, too.

When submitting, it’s good to remember that the process of writing your pieces is just as important as the result. No, it's more important! To be a writer means you’re writing, and if you get satisfaction in the process of writing and revising, that’s most important. It keeps you focused. When I published my first piece, I thought it would be world-changing. The next day I had to sit and write again, just the same as always. It was a good lesson.

So, the best way to deal with rejection is to not give up, and keep writing.

KML: A good question for next time: What is the reasoning behind the aesthetic of your journal/website?

Thanks so much for asking.  I don’t get asked very often about this, so I’m glad I get to talk about it here. 

Renee and I, while neither of us were born in West Virginia, we consider West Virginia home.  Most of my family is from there and it is where I went to undergrad. I spent most of my summers and holiday breaks there when I was growing up. So the aesthetic is partially made up of some of the things we most love about the state, which is hard to gather from organizations such as: MTV, CNN, Fox and pretty much most media outlets. Part of it, the souvenir part, is the idea that we could gather people across great distances with writing. That in some way their writing or art would be a way to describe where they’ve been and maybe inspire someone to go there as well, which is to say that human emotion and storytelling is a viable reason to gather people.

Our first artist/photographer had pictures from a mine in China. I met her one night in a darkroom when I was at Columbia University. We were both working on prints. I had to do a couple double takes to make sure that her prints were in fact not a coal mine in West Virginia.  The people living in these pictures resembled the stories that my grandmother used to tell me about growing up in a coal company town called Cassidy, and that stuck with me. To see Cassidy exist in China of all places, I felt made a pretty huge argument for the human spirit and connectivity in general.  I hope to show someone that the human condition exists in someone else’s home too.    

I’ve had the fortune to travel quite a bit, so most of the pictures on the site are my own. But we are trying to get people from around the country and world to submit their pictures too. The really neat picture of the bed was part of one my three tours of the east coast I made this past winter, while interviewing and trying to gather work for the journal. I was staying in my friend’s dorm, (he’s in medical school at Temple) and he had an extra mattress from what looked to be part of a bunk bed at one point. That night we went out into Philly, and had a heck of a time.  On the trip I made stops in Morgantown, Boston, Providence, NYC and actually bussed through Connecticut the day of the Sandy Hook shooting. Philly was my last stop before heading back to California. It was in Philly, while taking the most terrible shot ever (called a fire bomb) that I decided this thing—this Souvenir thing, would be for real. Temple also beat #3 Syracuse in basketball one of the nights I was in Philadelphia. I took that as a sign that Souvenir was written in the stars. 

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

NEXT POST: 6/4--Six Questions for Leah Horlick, Outgoing Poetry Editor, and Zach Matteson, Incoming Poetry Editor, PRISM international

Six Questions for Paul McQuade, Editor-in-chief, Ekto Magazine

Ekto is a multilingual literary quarterly specialising in flash fiction. Stories are accepted and published in English, French, Spanish and Japanese.

(ceased publication)

SQF: Why did you start this magazine?

PM: As someone who often reads in other languages (I read all languages published at Ekto, but primarily translate Japanese to English), I was looking for the same kind of changes in literary dissemination that I had seen in English-language writing. I have found a lot of writers whose work I love through online venues but when I went looking for the same thing in other languages it just wasn't present. I'm always looking for new and exciting writing (aren't all editors?), regardless of the language, so Ekto was made to discover writers outside English, and to bring new English-language writing to an online audience in other languages. Fortunately, I have a talented group of co-editors who helped make this possible. 

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

PM: While it may seem like a horrendously facile comment, we look for skill, excitement, and feeling. We don't need an emotional epic, but as long as we feel something strongly, and the language and story grip us, then we love it.  Sometimes we get well-written pieces with a story we don't care for, sometimes we get stories we like that are sloppily written, and sometimes whole pieces are beige. We need to see skill, be excited by the work, and feel some sort of emotion from it. 

As we work with flash fiction, time is of the essence. There is no novel-style preamble. There is no room for adjectival padding. Flash fiction is a process of distillation, of reducing a story to its essence. It has to be strong, or it doesn't flash, it just fizzles. 

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

PM: Any submissions that fail to respect our word count are immediately met with a raised eyebrow. It demonstrates a lack of professionalism, and effort, on the part of the writer. It's just shooting yourself in the foot, so why do it? 

Writing-wise, I'd say the most common mistake we see is writing that lacks momentum. We also see a lot of stories we've seen before (i.e. derivative, unoriginal) and writing that is still trying to find what it wants to say. A good exercise is to condense the essence of a story into a single sentence. Does your story really say this? If not, rewrite. Keep your story focused and driven. 

Also, as writers we should be aware of how language works. Grammatical mistakes and typos turn any editor off, though one or two can be forgiven. Confusing lay and lie is a personal bugbear of mine and makes me groan inwardly every time I read it.

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

PM: At Ekto we have four slushpiles (in each language) and from each of these we only accept three stories per reading period. This means that, unfortunately, our rejection rate is extremely high, and we have to rely on form rejections. We will sometimes provide a personal comment if we were particularly impressed or a story almost made it in. We encourage all writers whom we have rejected to try us again.

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

PM: Editing really makes you aware of what's going wrong in your own work. If you don't like something when you read a piece, look back at your own catalogue and see if you're doing the same. The writer ego often hides our failings from us. Viewing other people's work with a clinical eye helps with this, and you don't have to be an editor to do it. 

More than anything else, I think editing has taught me how vital excitement and momentum are in writing, and how many writers overlook this. They are too willing to give it all away upfront. Good writing revolves around fundamental unknowns; plot progresses as we slide along the edge of information gaps, all the time wanting to dive in and see what's at the bottom. Without that movement and the excitement of the unknown, writing tends to lie lifeless. 

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

PM: I think a good question to ask (in addition to the above; they're all good questions) would be how editors recommend dealing with rejection. Rejection is an essential part of the process and learning to turn it to your advantage is one of the most important things a writer can do. The first reaction is to be angry, to complain about how blind and stupid those editors are to reject you. (That's fine and healthy, but do it in private. Being disrespectful to editors is a good way to get nowhere.) But what writers need to learn is that editors reject pieces for a reason. Find that reason. Fix it. Learn not to make it again. This is when you grow most: when you are able to see your own work from outside yourself.

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

NEXT POST: 5/31--Six Questions for Renee K. Nicholson and Keegan Lester, Editors, Souvenir: a Journal

Six Questions for Alan A. Bedard, Editor, Digital-SF Magazine

Digital-SF Magazine is an online only publication of science fiction stories; issues are formatted for the Kindle reader. All stories are sold on consignment.

(ceased publication)

SQF: Why did you start this magazine?

AB: Hmm. Money? Fame? Hubris? Glib answers aside, I see a niche that needs filling. There are never enough venues for short stories, science fiction or otherwise. At the same time, electronic readers, such as Kindle, Nook, and their smartphone apps, are proliferating. Why not bring them together? While self-publishing of eBook novels has gone beyond anything the old ‘vanity press’ could have dreamed of, short stories and novelettes still need a venue. And writers can always benefit from the services of an editor. So with that in mind, Digital-SF Magazine was born.

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

AB: 

One - A good story. Something about the story has to be engaging. Either the story begs to be told, or the characters are so life-like that you want to read about them, or the images of new places or new things are so compelling that you want to learn more about them.

Two – It needs to be science fiction. Our guidelines spell out what that means for Digital-SF. But in brief, it’s stories about science- or technology-based conflict, stories taking place in speculative times and/or places, or drama that takes place with ray-guns and rocket ships.

Three – Good writing. Good spelling, grammar, and syntax. Consistent style. An editor can and will tweak the use of punctuation and fonts (such as quotation marks, italics, ellipses), but if the author's style of writing is sloppy or inconsistent, it can be very hard on the reader.

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

AB: No story to the story. It’s all too common to see beginning writers string together a series of descriptions and dialogs that don’t seem to go anywhere. Also, personal narratives. They may look like first person narratives, but they sound like excerpts from a personal diary. Good first person narratives can be very engaging, and some diarists have filled their pages with high prose. But poor writing is just poor writing. And of course, what really tweaks my tea kettle is a really good story, that just isn’t science fiction. I love the story, but Digital-SF is about ‘SF.’

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

AB: I always try to give some positive comment about a submission. And if the submission could be usable with just a little more work, I’ll make those comments. But I don’t want to get into the role of unsolicited mentor. There are many good places to go to share stories and get them critiqued. But that should be done before they are submitted for publication. And to be honest, just because I don’t find a story suitable, it doesn’t mean it’s bad, or that some other publication won’t like it.

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

AB: Well, you need a story; you need something you want to tell. And you need skill to write down the story. That takes practice. Surprisingly, there are fewer stories out there than one would think. But well told stories, even if they have been told before, are well worth the reading.

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

AB: Ask, “Why do writers need editors?” I would answer that writers often forget about the trees when they are planting a forest. Their vision is already alive in their head. For the reader, it has to grow. An editor gets to see it grow, and will notice if there is barren ground (missing plot elements) or badly planted trees (grammar, syntax, etc.). Together, great things can happen.

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

NEXT POST: 5/28--Six Questions for Paul McQuade, Editor-in-chief, Ekto Magazine

Six Questions for Melissa Swantkowski, Fiction Editor, Bodega

Bodega releases digital issues on the first Monday of every month, featuring poetry, prose to 3500 words, and quarterly interviews by established and emerging writers. Read the complete guidelines here.

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

MS: Bodega releases on the first Monday of every month, and each digital issue offers a handful of essential pieces that you can digest in one sitting. That means we’re looking for writing that is more than just competent, for stories that stick with us and surprise. It also means we’re looking for short-ish pieces—under 3500 words. Ideally we want reading Bodega to be like going to the corner store to grab a can of tuna and finding a red velvet cake, for free! 

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

MS: The most common mistake by far is that we get submissions that aren’t quite done. That sounds like a subjective thing (and maybe it is). But writing short pieces (we know from our own struggles) is hard. Many of the stories we receive feel like they want to reach a little farther without getting lengthier, and that’s a difficult thing to achieve. Often, it seems that if the writer had sat with it a little longer, the piece would have reached that greatness. 

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

MS: Not usually. That said, one thing I really enjoy is working with writers on edits. I sometimes respond to submissions that catch my eye but aren't quite there by asking if the writer is interested in working together to shape the piece. 

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

MS: No. But we're open to pieces that have appeared elsewhere in other non-print formats. For example, an upcoming piece is also being produced as a radio play (look for it in June). 

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?

MS: We reject submissions for a number or reasons, and not always because we don't like them. Because we publish such short issues, and because each one is carefully curated, sometimes we just can't find a place for a particular piece within a reasonable amount of time. We don't like to leave writers in limbo for months and months, so we decline the piece and hope they’ll submit again in the future.  And in the meantime, we hope they have great luck placing their piece. We're writers too, so it’s important to us to treat submitters with respect. 

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

n/a

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

NEXT POST: 5/24--Six Questions for Alan A. Bedard, Editor, Digital-SF

Six Questions for Kate Alexander-Kirk and Amy Sibley, Editors, Zest Literary Journal

Zest publishes fiction, creative nonfiction, flash fiction, poetry and art/photography. "We are most interested in writing that puts us in awe, makes us envious, that makes us laugh, cry, and rage; that is comforting and familiar, that is risky and dangerous."

(ceased publication)

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

Kate:

1. I like something that moves me – any which way. Dark humour is great but I just like being made to feel something. Even nothingness – if that isn’t too much of a contradiction!
2. I like originality and quirkiness.
3. I love reading things that make me think: WOW, I wish I’d written that!

Amy:

1. Although it’s an intangible thing, one knows when they’re reading good writing.  I look for writing that grabs me within the first few sentences or couple of paragraphs.
2. It needs to read like something that lots of thought, care and time have gone into.
3. I love reading about the everyday and the ordinary presented through the writing in a unique way. In creative nonfiction one may write about some spectacular event that’s happened to them, but it may not necessarily be good writing. A good writer can take everyday life, non-extraordinary events, and turn that into a captivating story.

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

Kate: It’s hard not to feel frustrated when people clearly haven’t read the submissions guidelines. Either it’s been previously published or it just doesn’t fit the theme – or they submit it directly on to our website as a comment. 

Amy: Same as Kate, ignoring any of the submission guidelines is an immediate turn off and will likely lead to rejection. If you can’t be bothered to read less than a page worth of instructions, how can I assume you’ve read and edited your own writing with any care? Ignoring the guidelines creates unnecessary work for the editors and makes me assume you don’t respect my time or the work we put into the publication. Also, common punctuation and grammar mistakes are a big turn off and likely will lead to rejection.

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

Kate: Absolutely! That was one of the biggest reasons why I wanted to set up my own e-zine. Too many editors just don’t provide feedback. When people submit their writing/artwork they’re taking a risk and can feel quite vulnerable. I know how that feels. I’ve been there too many times. You wait, sometimes months – sometimes well over a year – just to get a simple, unhelpful ‘no thanks’. I feel it’s crucial for editors to treat each submission with respect. It can be really demoralising to experience this lack of interest or a willingness to help. Most of us are giving up our time to do this and aren’t making money from it. We’re doing it for the love of it, so why not offer a little feedback as to why it didn’t make the cut or indeed, why it did! 

Amy: I think a small amount of feedback is certainly warranted. Even if it’s as simple as explaining we don’t feel the piece is polished enough or it doesn’t fit our theme closely enough. But I don’t feel it should be expected of editors to give loads of feedback. Realistically, there’s just not time to do that and we’re not providing a workshop service. But, I think it’s certainly reasonable to explain why we chose not to accept the piece.

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

Kate: This is an interesting question. In the first issue we did accept a piece that had appeared on a personal blog, but that was because our disclaimer for previously unpublished work had not been posted on our site yet. It’s pretty standard to ask for previously unpublished work. On a personal level, I respect this and like this because it gives me an opportunity to create something new and to develop as a writer when I want to submit to a journal/e-zine.

Amy: Having spent ten years in the publishing industry I’m a bit of a stickler for permissions and copyright issues. Although I’m not overly bothered by the idea of it having been on a personal blog, I don’t see it as appropriate to draw the line in such an arbitrary way. If it’s on the web, it can essentially be considered published. Most publishing companies wouldn’t accept content that’s been published online, including a personal blog, so I think as a small start-up journal, we should be holding ourselves to that standard as well.

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?

Kate: Personally I have no problem with this. It would be unrealistic to get involved in a weighty dialogue with each and every submitter. Yet I think it’s completely acceptable for someone to reply to a rejection either to acknowledge it or to ask for clarification. Amy and I always provide some feedback as to why the piece didn’t quite work/wasn’t quite suitable for the issue and so hopefully any potential queries are already answered. I remember getting a rejection that said: “I'm sorry but I'm not sure about this piece, so will leave it this time.” How on earth can an editor think that a writer will be satisfied with that kind of response? I wouldn’t normally write back to query it but this was too enigmatic; it made me curious. My email was polite, not demanding, quite simply I asked for clarification. I got a swift and snarky response about how incredibly busy she was and how I should contact a critiquing service if I wanted feedback. Okay, we all have off-days, we’re human but don’t offload your personal issues to your contributors. If a piece doesn’t work for you, give a reason why. It’s a simple courtesy and there’s no need to be cryptic. 

Amy: I think by offering a solid, reasonable response for why we rejected it up front, we’re avoiding that ambiguity one can sometimes feel about why a piece hasn’t been accepted. I wouldn’t mind the odd follow-up question, but it does create the concern if you do it for one person, then you may be expected to do it for all. I’ve told some contributors we’ve rejected, in addition to my feedback, that the piece would benefit from being workshopped and then provided suggestions on how they could obtain that workshop experience in case they were unfamiliar with how to go about that. We also definitely encourage people to resubmit it once they’ve revised the piece.

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

Kate: Ooh, that’s tough. Maybe it should be a question on how to cope with rejection. The first time I ever plucked up the courage to submit a story anywhere I was fortunate enough to receive an acceptance. I was totally chuffed and totally clueless. I can’t tell you how many rejections I had to overcome before something else got snapped up. I’ve kept all of these email rejections. They’re all important. It’s too easy to succumb to the fear and vulnerability that every artist experiences (a great deal of the time!). Use these rejections to help you to improve. Take on board the advice that works for you and try not to take it personally. A good friend and great writer Stephen V Ramey once advised me just to resubmit my story somewhere else as soon as it was rejected. Get it back out. If you can, rework it, then resubmit it. If it’s good enough, it’ll get scooped up. I now know from my experience as an editor, quite often work doesn’t get rejected because it’s bad, it’s just not always the right fit in that place at that time. So get back up to the plate and take another swing with the bat!

Amy: What should a contributor do if their piece gets accepted, but they don’t agree with edits the editors have suggested?

After accepting a piece, we do review it more closely and make suggested edits. Rather than just make them we suggest them to the author and then have them confirm/make the changes. Not everyone is going to like all of our suggestions and I know as an author in that position, I personally had felt afraid to disagree. But, as an editor, I just want to say: don’t be. We are careful to be very respectful when suggesting edits, and polite disagreement is more than welcome. We’ve accepted the piece, we’re not going to change our minds. So, we’re more than happy to work with the author to make sure we’re all happy with the final piece for publication.

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

NEXT POST: 5/21--Six Questions for Melissa Swantkowski, Fiction Editor, Bodega

Six Questions for Athena Dixon, Editor-in-Chief, Linden Avenue Literary Journal

Linden Avenue publishes poetry and short fiction that highlights the intersection between art and everyday life. 

(Ceased publication)

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

AD: I look for work that takes the everyday and blows it out of the water. I like work that considers the nuances of what it is to be alive, but doesn’t bog it down in common image. I love work that plays with words that do duel work, has strong line breaks, and oozes musicality. I want work that resonates on the page and in the mouth. 

A writer who can take the mundane and make me lean into my screen is one of the highlights of publishing Linden Avenue. 

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

AD: There are a few things. I dislike constant submissions and withdrawals. Simultaneous submissions are accepted. However, I’ve encountered several instances in which an author will do this multiple times over the course of a week or two. It makes it difficult to keep track of what he or she actually wants me to consider. I tend to remember those names.

As well, I find submissions not properly proofread to be off-putting. Linden Avenue does review the work; however, we are not responsible for correcting multiple mistakes in submissions. 

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

AD: I do provide comments on some rejections, but those come when a piece was very close to submission, or I think the author’s work would fit well in an upcoming issue. Time, and volume of submissions, doesn’t allow me to do this with each author. 

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

AD: Linden Avenue accepts poetry published on personal blogs with the requirement the post is deleted or made private during the month the piece is live on our site. Once the monthly issue is archived, the writer can repost the work. 

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?

AD: Linden Avenue is still a pretty small journal. I’ve recently added a reader, Angie Chatman, to vote on submissions, but we are still working on managing how to give each submission a personal touch. There are a lot of submissions so I’m not very vocal in my responses unless the piece particularly blew me away or was very close to acceptance. Those responses usually come with specific notes or a request to submit again. 

If a writer would like a brief comment, he or she can reach me via Linden Avenue’s Gmail account or the contact form on our website. I would just ask that a bit of time to respond. 

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

AD: What can a writer do to become a part of Linden Avenue? I’m always looking for people to help push Linden Avenue forward. Our one year anniversary is approaching, and I have some plans for the journal I can’t do alone. We are actively seeking a social media guru, a logo designer, and anyone who thinks they have something to contribute. 

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

NEXT POST: 5/17--Six Questions for Kate Alexander-Kirk and Amy Sibley, Editors, Zest Literary Journal

Six Questions for Garry Somers, Editor, The Blotter

The Blotter publishes short prose, ultra-short fiction to 500 words, poetry, photojournalism/essay and "monthly columns that go beyond or beneath the pabulum you're expected to enjoy." Learn more here.

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

GS: The "surprise" factor in a piece - something fresh in the author's approach to a subject, characterization or image, because that's entertainment. Clarity of thought, because not all literature has to be cryptic and exclusive. Love of putting words together, because if the writer isn't having fun, how can the reader?

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

GS: We often look past the professional submission rigamarole, because that's a great way to find the authors that turn us on to new things, but we sometimes receive stuff that, if we were to place it in our pages, would evoke a different response than the author's original intent. We want to avoid an author's sincerity being misrepresented by us as sarcastic wit. 

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

GS: Yes. Writing in a vacuum or among worshipful friends and family is not always the most productive path. We feel that there are kernels of worth in any piece that can be mentioned to help in the growth process every writer is going through. We talk to those first, and then explain what other aspects of a piece prevented our considering it. It is not our intent to be pretentious or preachy: a submitter can take it or leave it as they wish. 

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

GS: Sure. Good is good.

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?  

GS: Writing is a learning process. So is editing and publishing. None of it works as well without communicating back and forth.

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

GS: "What is your favorite thing about this business and your least favorite thing?" Fave = seeing some terrific work coming completely out of the blue. The kind of things you can't believe aren't already snapped up by world-class publishers and on best-seller lists. Least fave = seeing very good 'zines and journals go by the wayside either because financials didn't jibe or because interest waned.  

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

NEXT POST: 5/14--Six Questions for Athena Dixon, Editor-in-Chief, Linden Avenue Literary Journal

Six Questions for Jo-Anne Rosen, Publisher/Editor, Wordrunner echapbooks

Wordrunner echapbooks publishes four collections of fiction, poetry or memoir (personal narrative) per year, each featuring one or two authors, and an occasional anthology. Read the complete guidelines here.

JP: The echapbooks are available online and may also be downloaded as pdfs. Our online version includes hyperlinks to enrich the reading. Authors receive a token payment and there is no fee to submit.

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

JR: Polished writing throughout but especially in the opening lines, so we will want to read more. Polished means more than trimming the language. We want to read only what is essential to a story (or memoir piece or poem).

A strong, engaging voice with an original perspective that makes us want to read every word.

Substance. We prefer stories and poems that explore life's important issues. 

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

JR: Insufficient text (writers should read the guidelines). These are collections of a certain length. Submissions a few pages long are automatically rejected (with the exception of those submitted to the annual anthology).

Stories about animals. We want stories about people.

Hackneyed characters or images. Cliches. We don't want to feel we've read this before.

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.

JR: Character is more important. But also a story needs an arc or a spine and must clearly resolve at the end. This is not necessarily a function of plot. 

SQF: What advice can you offer new authors hoping to publish their first collection with Wordrunner echapbooks?

JR: Give us your best. Stories (or poems or memoir) should be linked in some way, thematically or through characters.  Do not submit one story only to a collection issue or less than required number of words.

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

JR: How to “kill one's darlings,” cut what's not needed, and make every sentence essential to the whole. 

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

n/a

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

NEXT POST: 5/10--Six Questions for Garry Somers, Editor, The Blotter

Six Questions for Gary Markette, Editor, Anotherealm

Anotherealm publishes science fiction, fantasy or horror full length stories to 5000 words and flash fiction to 1000 words. Read the complete guidelines here.

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

GM:

1. No gross errors; grammatical or style errors automatically disqualify a submission.
2. A lack of MEGO (My Eyes Glaze Over) factor; if I find my attention wandering while I read, the story is in trouble.
3. Strong story elements: interesting characters, crisp dialog, graceful prose, logical progression -- all of these and more are important

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

GM: See my answer to your first question.

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

GM: Not for free; I will critique a story at 1 cent per word at the writer's request. I get almost 300 stories per year and I have a "real" job. I don't have time to teach for free.

    

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

GM: Anotherealm buys first electronic publishing rights so, no.

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?

GM: See my answer to your third question: in essence, if they're purchasing my comments, I PREFER it if they ask questions -- polite or not.

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

GM: What format do you prefer for submissions to your magazine?

I get stories typed in many ways and in many formats. Preparing stories for html publication involves significant reformatting time. If, for example, writers submitted their stories in simple ASCII text with single paragraph marks at the end of paragraphs (rather than at the end of each line), they'd have a better chance of publication.

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

NEXT POST: 5/7--Six Questions for Jo-Anne Rosen, Publisher/Editor, Wordrunner echapbooks