Six Questions for John Mannone, Senior Poetry Editor, Abyss & Apex

Abyss & Apex likes to see strong, emotionally resonant, literary-quality poetry with a clear speculative element (fantasy, science fiction, or any combination of the two), as well as scifaiku and what some call “science poetry” or “astronomy poetry.” Although dark fantasy and dark SF are encouraged, we DO NOT publish horror. Read the complete guidelines here.

SQF: What, when reading a submission, really gets you excited?

John Mannone: I get excited when I can publish the best speculative poetry out there. And I get doubly excited when that poetry stimulates the intellect as well as the imagination, but also educates as well as entertains. I get excited when the poem sticks with me after I’ve read it and when it transcends genre. I want poetry that is accessible, but I want literary quality poetry with a speculative element, especially science fiction and fantasy, which also has literary depth (be able to answer the “so what?” question). I favor lyrical work, but conversational pieces are fine provided they too have impeccable rhythm and something more to offer than story. In a recent interview with the editor of Poetry Pacific, Chanming Yuan, I go into more depth on my editorial focus and personal aesthetics.

SQF: What most often turns you off to a submission?

JM: I’ve said it elsewhere before—I eschew cut-up prose arranged to look like a poem. I understand that narratives and conversational pieces could look prosy, but there should be a preponderance of poetic craft present to lift it into poetry. However, the single most flagrant violation I caution against is inattentiveness to rhythm and flow and to the music of words. Even conversationally toned pieces can be skillfully crafted. The other mortal sin is lack of literary depth.

I am usually not impressed by cutesy or clever pieces, and very short work must be stellar to be considered (though it has a better chance for publication if the short pieces are either linked or form a loosely themed constellation).

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

JM: In general, no. I tend not to publish material posted on a personal blog, especially because we are a paying market. I want material that hasn’t appeared anywhere before that would be available to the general public.

SQF: What do you want authors to know about the submissions you reject and how authors should respond?

JM: I am going to answer a broader question—my process of selection/rejection. I personally read each submission several times over a period of time before I respond. The process is a little different here than for other venues because though we publish quarterly, we have only two specific monthly windows during which we accept poetry submissions electronically (June and December). I read the poems when they arrive in my inbox to get a general sense of the work. I record my first impressions. A week or two later, I do a more careful reading and cull the selections for the ones that merit a closer look, and then again at the end of the reading period to make the final selections for the next two issues. With the author’s permission, I may carry/hold some work over, but I try to avoid that; it is best for the author to make submissions early in the reading period. Every piece submitted receives serious attention. Understand, however, a poem arriving in my inbox on the last day will only get those several readings in the same day instead of being spread out over a few weeks. 

Another reason I don’t make quick decisions is so that I can better see how all the final-round poems might work together. (And reading all the poems at the same time helps mitigate any fluctuations of my mood.) Often, I make editorial suggestions that I think will improve the poems I want to publish; I like to work closely with the author. I am saddened when I have to turn away good work, but I often send a personal note of encouragement. I do have form responses, but they are tiered and tailored for often-seen reasons. Because I hate receiving form responses full of abstractions, I try to be a little more helpful to the authors I must turn away. Occasionally, I’ll recommend other venues, if I recognize the poem fits thE other magazine’s aesthetic better than it does ours. I always welcome polite responses from the authors.

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

JM: One of the most important things I learned is to make sure my personal submissions show a dynamic range of style, voice, and form (consistent with the aesthetics of the venue). I cannot tell you how many times I have seen little to no variation from one poem to the next in a submission package from a particular author (and that’s for every venue I have edited and poetry contest I have judged). I recognize that sometimes it is like a stylistic signature, but most often it is not. Editors want to see some range of style, and that’s one reason you’ll often be asked to submit 3 to 5 poems.

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

JM: None at the moment.

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

NEXT POST: 6/6--Six Questions for Joseph Levens, Editor, The Summerset Review

Six Questions for Tammy Ho Lai-Ming and Jeff Zroback, Co-Editors, Cha

Cha: An Asian Literary Journal, founded in 2007, a decade after the handover, is the first Hong Kong-based English online literary journal; it is dedicated to publishing quality poetry, fiction, creative non-fiction, reviews and photography & art from and about Asia. Pieces first published in the journal have been translated into Japanese, Swedish and French. 

(ceased publication)

SQF: Why did you start this magazine?

Tammy Ho Lai-Ming & Jeff Zroback: We started Cha in the summer of 2007 because we realized that Hong Kong did not have an English-language online literary journal. Such journals are very common in the West but are less widely available in Asia. From our observation, we also knew that there is a lot of great writing in English in Asia but that it often goes unnoticed. We therefore decided to found Cha, as a means of trying to support new writing from and about Asia. As one of us (Jeff) is an editor by trade and we both had had the experience of editing literary works, we felt that we were in a good position to start the journal.

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

THL & JZ: 

1) Good writing – Of course!

2) Perspective – We are drawn to submissions that provide a fresh or honest perspective on their subject matter. For prose, we usually look for pieces that offer a take on “the Asian experience” which feels particularly original or insightful. For poetry, we are less concerned that the work has a specifically Asian theme, but we are still looking for originality and honesty.

3) It varies – For every issue, we have a guest poetry editor and a guest prose editor, who are writers that have previously appeared in the journal. Because they all bring their own sensibilities and preferences to the submissions, what kinds of pieces we accept varies from issue to issue. We really appreciate the new perspectives the guest editors bring to the journal – they keep Cha feeling fresh and prevent us from rehashing the same themes and subjects.

SQF: What most often turns you off to a submission?

THL & JZ: Poor writing, well-worn subject matter, trying too hard, doing too little.

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

THL & JZ: Considering what we just said above, this might sound a tad hypocritical, but we don’t normally provide comments. Due to the number of submissions we receive, it would be impossible to provide personalised feedback on every one of them. The exception is if a piece was strong and just missed being published in Cha – then we might send some comments to the author explaining why he/she just missed the cut. More often than not, we provide comments when we *accept* a submission, especially if one of the editors is moved enough to write a few sentences explaining why he/she liked the piece.

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

THL & JZ: That it is really hard to write well, but that there are a surprising number of people who still manage to do it.

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

THL & JZ: Which writer would you most like to publish in Cha? The new one, whose first publication is with us.

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

NEXT POST: 5/30--Six Questions for John Mannone, Senior Poetry Editor, Abyss & Apex

Six Questions for Shweta Sharan, Founding Editor, The Affair

The Affair is a new, paying market that publishes short stories (1000 to 3000 words) in most genres.

(Ceased publication)

SQF: Why did you start this magazine?

Shweta Sharan: Most actors say that as kids, they put up plays in their backyards. I was putting together magazines ever since I was nine, in some form or the other. I enjoyed reading different kinds of stories, and I wanted to put them together and distribute them.

In short, I wanted to put different kinds of stories under the same roof. I enjoy different kinds of fiction, from Ian McEwan, Sir Arthur Conan Doyle and George Saunders to Kelly Link, Michael Moorcock and Glen Hirshberg.

The other reason I started the magazine was to make fiction a career option and also to do something different with the short story, to really use it to impact reading choices.

This is something the magazine will do in a big way, once we launch -- we will engage with different reading communities on a one-to-one basis.

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

SS: We look for good writing, a story that has strength and momentum and holds the reader's interest, and to a reasonable extent, layered writing. We encourage inventive use of language and craft. Writing is, in many ways, an exploration. We look for that a great deal.

SQF: What most often turns you off to a submission?

SS: Many things. Poor writing, uninspired and forced storytelling, banalities, weak narratives.

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

SS: Yes. We try and workshop submissions, to whatever extent possible, and because of the sheer volume of submissions that we receive, it becomes difficult. We are in the process of finding more people to read and respond to submissions.

SQF: You are based in India. Are submissions open to writers from around the world?

SS: Yes! Our first issue has a famous writer from Philippines, Dean Francis Alfar. Our second issue has a writer from Australia. We get lots of submissions from America, the UK and even China. In fact, I am keen to publish writers from different places -- Colombia, Zimbabwe, etc. I don't know if what we pay is on par with what writers get paid in the US, UK and Australia. I suppose if we paid more, we would attract more talent from other countries. Hopefully, we will take off and achieve that.

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

SS: Maybe a question on where I see the magazine heading, a few years down the line. It is a small, independent little magazine and only time will tell about our future and what happens, but a few other magazines have been supportive of our existence. It is the same with some writers. I am a firm believer in establishing a system of support magazines like Pank, which has a tip jar for writers, and I think we need such innovative and interesting ways to sustain our business. Also, I have a four-year-old daughter who loves reading and all my friends who are moms who go out of their way to encourage reading with their kids. Some of them have storytelling and book clubs for kids and they come up with some great ideas, and I am inspired by that also, to keep the magazine new and interesting.

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

NEXT POST: 5/23--Six Questions for Tammy Ho Lai-Ming and Jeff Zroback, Co-Editors, Cha

Six Questions for Christopher T Garry, Founder/Managing Editor, Black Denim Lit

This site ceased publication as of February 2018.


Black Denim Lit publishes short fiction to 7500 words and artwork. Most genre are acceptable, but general, sci-fi, and fantasy are preferred. 

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

CTG: We watch for submission guidelines, cover-letter decorum, craft and execution. You'd think that was a given, but folks miss it. Whether or not a piece is "genre" is secondary to us. Above all, the piece has to achieve truth, complexity and resonance ... that is, lasting artistic merit that resonates with the aesthetic of our venue and the hearts of our reader-base.

The fact that we print "genre" alongside "non-genre" may cause problems down the road. For example, this variously bothers either the Lit or the Scifi/Fantasy community, and we may be relegated to the edge of both. You can read Ted Morrissey's "Scent of Darkness" and discuss all day whether it's a true fantasy piece based on your reading of the crow. The readers we appeal to won't care to argue about "genre." They're on about deeper truths, which is what we like to hear.

When it all goes right, it's mystical. When it goes wrong you can point to any one of a thousand things, looking at Bartleby Snopes' rejectionletter tag cloud, for example.

SQF: What most often turns you off to a submission?

CTG: Again, there are lots of complaints from editors about following format guidelines, decorum, craft and execution. That aside, I'll say that my biggest gripe within the words is lack of development. There has been a gag image going around the boards for years of Michelangelo's David "photoshopped" to look a hundred pounds overweight. It's gorgeous, arguably just a beautiful as the original, in every detail of the artisan's expression of their sculpting skills. Despite this, the fat David has a variation that is better: it's argued that Michelangelo's original is the ideal.

A piece of writing can be like that fat David. Stubborn writers are often too engrossed with detail to see an insufficient choice in development early on. An editor comes along and says, "stunning detail, beautiful choice of stone. Why is he fat?" When the author has failed to answer that kind of question within their narrative (considering that there is a variation that could be better), then I say that the piece lacks development. About a fourth of our decline letters include some variation of "good idea, keep developing."

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

CTG: No, I would be sad if a reader recognized a piece and skipped out, missing whatever other new material we offered. With around 5000 venues listed (spring, 2014) between Duotrope, The Submission Grinder, P&W and other indexes, it's clear that any magazine even remotely similar to ours is looking to make a unique and lasting impression on potential readers.

We're paying semi-pro rates (penny a word) for licensing new material from new and established authors. For that effort, we'd like to be the first publication of record. We may acquire the license for reprints at some point, but for now the writers and readers seem to have an unending appetite for new material. We are open to any option though. For example, we're considering producing some public domain classics and discussing with the readers what still works today.

SQF: You published your first issue in February. Do you have a favorite story from the first three issues?

CTG: Mmm, Jerry Seinfeld wouldn't identify his favorite episode, saying (roughly) it's like breathing—you don't have a favorite breath, since it's each one that gets you to the next. Cute answers aside, as an editor, I hunger for that one piece that "hits the spot," since it's one that may mean more readers. As we get closer to award deadlines we will be nominating a number of our pieces to Pushcart, Million Writers, etc for various reasons. After beating out 90% of the other submitters, not everyone gets a ribbon, unfortunately. It's maddening to listen to an editor say, "we'll know when we see it." It's even more maddening to say, "we like Tim," and then get a flood of submissions that are just like that Tim's.

SQF: What magazines do you read?

CTG: I hope "Pre-Campbellian" counts, even though it comes out annually. It's astonishing to hold so much quality new-writer material from around the world in a single massive tome. For e-Books, it's probably obvious we have an affinity for Beneath Ceaseless Skies. For print, it's Asimov's. For Lit it's Bartleby Snopes. Many, many others.

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

CTG: There are a number of topics being considered today: reader attention spans are getting shorter; the writer/publisher bar is lowering; literacy of authors and readers is declining; readership is shrinking...and a hundred other points about the direction of academics, industry or creativity. So the question is, as a publisher, what impact do you hope to have?

Great joy comes from connecting a writer and a reader. The writer's first and greatest hurdle is getting from brain to paper. For left-field inspiration, read some of the things that Carly Fleishman has said about autism. Then you can guess the level of frustration being a young writer trying to get someone to understand your work. So, looking back at the author, we're trying to read and re-direct. Looking forward to the reader, we're trying to meet halfway. Electronic publishing is part of that solution. Bottom line, we're working on any larger problem you could bring up by working with one reader/writer at a time. (http://www.positiveregard.com/starfish/starfish.html) That's in the "approachability" part of our charter.

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

NEXT POST: 5/20--Six Questions for Shweta Sharan, Founding Editor, The Affair

Six Questions for Shinjini Bhattacharjee, Editor, Hermeneutic Chaos Literary Journal

Hermeneutic Chaos Literary Journal is a monthly magazine publishing poetry in both prose and verse, and fiction under 500 words. 

(ceased publication)

SQF: Why did you start this magazine?

Shinjini Bhattacharjee: As a student of literature, I have always wanted to stay in touch with good writing of all kinds, unbiased by its inclusion or exclusion from the present literary scenario aesthetically colonized by social canon. Hence, starting a literary journal was the only appropriate decision to take. Another intention was to create a journal without any excessive technological dilution. That is why the journal’s design has been kept to a minimum without any unnecessary cluttered complexity. I want the focus of the journal to be only on poetry and prose.

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

SB: The journal primarily desires writings that do not embody, to alter a famous statement, “writing for writing’s sake.” I look for works where the authors actually feel what they write, and not because they have to, merely to see their names in literary journals. I strongly believe that this is the most important characteristic defining a good piece of literature. It is extremely easy to recognize a detached poem or a fiction in which the words fail to communicate the emotions which binds them to their writers. I want literature where the authors live their compositions. Asking the words to carry impressions of compelling imagery and powerful language is another criterion. Literature is not a fictional diary carrying banal descriptions. It is meant to interpret incidents and emotions in a new light. It is also important to understand that literature always presupposes an audience, which, in a sense, also rewrites the text through its own interpretations. Writers and readers both play important roles in creating a successful literary artifact. So, I do not appreciate solipsistic musings which do not open an interaction with the readers.

SQF: Your guidelines state the inspirations for prose are Virginia Woolf, Sylvia Plath and Margaret Atwood. Can you be a little more specific as to what it is about their writing that attracts you?

SB: I feel that Virginia Woolf, Sylvia Plath and Margaret Atwood constitute the literary triumvirates. Every word they write is an epiphany, and they also know exactly how to narrate emotions in a good story. I am also in awe of the imagery, subtle yet profound, which they have incorporated in their works, and their distinct experimental style and tone. I also appreciate the way they have managed to passionately connect to the words they have used in their literary outpourings. I admire their narrative style as well­—semantically disjointed but uniting the human emotions in a more satisfying manner.

SQF: "We want poems where words contemplate the interpretations of instincts and deeper strokes of human dilemma.” Can you name a poem or two that exemplify this statement?

SB: I believe Sylvia Plath’s ‘Gigolo’ and Anne Waldman’s ‘Attenuate the Loss and Find’ suitably exemplify it.

SQF: Hemingway is famous for his six word story. What six words would you use to describe Hermeneutic Chaos?

SB: Telling Art What It Can Do

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

SB: How do I see HCLJ a few years down the line?

Although it has been launched quite recently, I have huge plans for Hermeneutic Chaos Literary Journal. One of the projects in the pipelines is to establish a direct contact between the writers and the readers, something which most of the online journals do not attempt. A good piece of literature, as I mentioned earlier, has to involve a communication between the writer and the reader. I also intend to publish chapbooks in the future, if time permits. I do not know how long will it take for these ideas to assume shape, but for now, I am happy offering good writing a hospitable home.

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

NEXT POST: 5/20--Six Questions for Christopher T Garry, Founder/Managing Editor, Black Denim Lit

Six Questions for Carolyn Keogh, Editor, Miniature Magazine

Miniature Magazine is a quarterly online magazine dedicated to creating a platform for writing that isn’t undermined or jeopardized by its small stature. We aim to publish writing that makes the most of being what some might call miniature. In addition to fiction, poetry, essays and prose, we also publish art and illustration. All written content falls near or under the 1,000-word range, showing how much can be done with a little.

(ceased publication)

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

Carolyn Keogh: I think the first thing I look for in a submission is that there is something unusual or unexpected about the piece. I like being surprised -- either by the content or the way a poem or story is framed or even by how it looks on the page. I think this element of surprise is important when working within the confines of 1000 or so words.

The second would be humor. Even in the saddest or most serious submissions, I look for a hint of wit. The third thing I look for is efficiency of space and length. I'm often most impressed by short submissions that utilize every single word. I look to make sure no word is wasted in the submissions we accept.

SQF: What most often turns you off to a submission?

CK: Anything that has a completely bland first line. This is totally subjective but if it doesn't grab me right at the beginning, I will often loose interest pretty quickly. 

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

CK: We'd prefer material that hasn't been published but would be open to reading submissions that have been posted on personal blogs.


SQF: What is it that drew you to the miniature form?

CK: I've always been more inclined to read novellas than tomes. I think there's something impressive about being able to pack a real narrative punch without taking up too much of the reader's time or the page's space. I also wanted the magazine to take the form of a small treat -- something that readers could enjoy in one sitting and relish for a moment.


SQF: What makes you laugh?

CK: This is an extremely difficult question because I feel like I'm almost always laughing but something that makes me laugh the most is language humor -- plays on words and bad translations always get me. I'm also an unabashed lover of puns.


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

CK: I think I wish you'd asked about our art submissions -- we accept comics, illustrations, paintings and photographs.

Thank you for your questions, I had a wonderful time answering them. More info can be found on our website. 

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

NEXT POST: 5/16--Six Questions for Shinjini Bhattacharjee, Editor, Hermeneutic Chaos Literary Journal

Six Questions for Ken Honeywell, Editor-in-Chief, Punchnel's

Punchnel’s is a general-interest web magazine written for a smart, discerning audience of adults around the world. We are always looking for intelligent, charming new voices. Most pieces we buy are between 400 and 1,200 words. The magazine publishes fiction, nonfiction and poetry.

(Ceased publication)

SQF: Why did you start this magazine?

Ken Honeywell: We started Punchnel's because we love writers and because we could. I observed that there were lots of excellent writers in the world who were posting lots of stuff on the Internet that, in some cases, lots of people were reading and no one was paying for. My partner and I run a successful ad agency, and we decided it would be nice to run an online publication that would pay writers a little bit for their contributions. We also felt as if we could build some regional and local--we're in Indianapolis--energy about writing and writers.

And, frankly, we just get off on this stuff. Someone once told me that Punchnel's was "your golf game." That's pretty accurate.

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

KH: 

1. Is it well written? We don't generally have time to mess with bad writing, even if the subject matter is interesting.
2. Is it provocative? We want to see things you think might not work elsewhere, and things that take a contrarian view of the subject matter. These are consistently our best-read posts.
3. Is there more? We love well-written one-off pieces. But we love it even more if you have something bigger you'd like to do. We're open to nonfiction series, ongoing reportage/opinion/or columns, and serial novels, and would love to have more.

SQF: What most often turns you off to a submission?

KH: Bad writing and sloppiness. We get a lot of submissions. We stop reading as soon as it's clear the writing isn't up to our standards.

SQF: You have a series called Second Chance, in which you ask authors to take a creative work they didn’t like the first time they encountered it and revisit the work to see if they feel differently about the work now, How did you come up with this idea?

KH: It was our poetry editor Jenny Walton's idea. It was born of the idea that our opinions change as we get older, and some books and films and albums we loved at one point don't really hold up over time. And vice-versa: something you didn't "get" when you were younger may sing to you today. We'd love to see more of these pieces, actually.

SQF: Your guidelines say you like humor. What makes you laugh?

KH: Absurdity. The unexpected. We're surprisingly not terribly snarky, although we almost certainly fall on the "snark" side of the snark/smarm continuum.

But we love Rolli's cartoons. We love the pieces we've been running by Andy Bankin, and the stuff we run by Jen Bingham is funny in a way we find charming.

Actually, our sense of humor is pretty broad. We try to stay away from corny stuff, but we're pretty open. If you think it's funny, send it.

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

KH: How can writers endear themselves to you?

A: When we publish your piece, you can help us promote it. We don't advertise; we're not on the newsstand. Sometimes, we pay to promote posts on Facebook. But if lots of people are going to see your post, we need your help.

And it would help us if you'd read us and follow us on Facebook and Twitter and tell your friends about us and occasionally pimp some of the stuff we publish that you didn't write. It's just possible that we could pay writers more someday, but it will take an increase in readership to do that. We appreciate any way you can help us get more readers more regularly (including you).

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

NEXT POST: 5/13--Six Questions for Carolyn Keogh, Editor, Miniature Magazine

Six Questions for Leslie LaChance, Editor and Publisher, Mixitini Matrix: A Journal of Creative Collaboration

Mixitini Matrix is a multigenre, multidisciplinary journal of creative collaboration. Right now we aim to publish at least twice per year, fall/winter and spring/summer. We’re seeking fiction, non-fiction, poetry, and visual art created by two or more people, or works offering perspectives on the process of creative collaboration.

(Ceased publication)

SQF: Why did you start this magazine?

Leslie LaChance: I began working in the visual arts through collage with found texts and images, and thus I'm interested in work that feels, in some way, like collage, appropriation. I've always felt that no artist or writer works in a vacuum. Publishers, writers, and artists value "originality" and "uniqueness." But somewhere in the process of creating that unique and original vision, we're suggestible...at least a little bit. We're open to influence. Some artists and writers embrace that, revel in it, riff on it, incorporate it, while others resist. I've always been as interested in artistic processes as in product, and so I wanted to create a publication that has something to say about both, and acknowledges, even at the most subtle level, the role of influence, the place of conversation, the various layers and intertwining that happen along the way. But what intrigues me most is when artists and writers who revel in collaborative processes take an interest in sharing how collaboration/influence shapes their work.


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

LL: We look for thoughtful, accomplished texts and images that address, in some way, the theme of collaboration. We like work that surprises us, makes us see art/writing/collaboration in a new way. We want to be compelled -- to read, to look, to think, to feel, to create -- by the work we see.


SQF: What most often turns you off to a submission? 

LL: First, if the material does not in anyway suggest to us that the author/artist knows what our magazine is about, we won't consider it. We ask authors and artists to include with their submission a brief note about how and why they think their piece fits our theme, to show us that they've read some issues, read the guidelines, and are committed to being part of that vision. Or, if authors and artists don't exactly follow the guidelines, it helps if there seems to be a good reason for resisting them. It's really annoying and a waste of time to have to look at a submission that in no way acknowledges collaboration or influence. Why bother sending the work? Secondly, we see lots of work that suggests to us that the creators need more time, and perhaps just more time to study, to develop their art. I wish we could be more helpful to these folks, but there's just not space or time for that.

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

LL: Not usually, unless we find something especially interesting in the piece and feel the need to encourage the author/artist to take it further.


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

LL: I've learned more about how to tune in to the possibility of conversation -- amongst writers, amongst artists, between readers/viewers and writers/artists. I've also been encouraged to read more widely, to pay more attention to art when I am looking at it, to be more fearless in how I make use of the interplay of genres in my own work.


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

LL: Lots of people ask me how we define "collaboration." I tell them to think of it in broad terms, not merely as work created by two or more people. We include translation, ekphrastic, mixed media, homage, essays about collaborative processes, riffs, correspondences, and even have a category we call "concoctions" for masala/melange kind of stuff. And we're suggestible.

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

NEXT POST: 5/9--Six Questions for Ken Honeywell, Editor-in-Chief, Punchnel's

Six Questions for Alisa Golden, Editor, Star 82 Review

Star 82 Review is a full-color online and print-on-demand art and literary magazine that highlights words and images in gemlike forms, and is interested in the displaced person and the oddness of everyday life. Each issue features literary fiction and creative nonfiction to 1000 words, poetry and art. Read the complete guidelines here.

SQF: Why did you start this magazine?

Alisa Golden: I wanted to provide a forum and opportunity for people who are writers and artists and to create a bridge between the literary and art worlds. I hope to encourage new ways of seeing and making, that’s why I include categories such as erasure text and postcard lit: they are visual and verbal. I see the creative process as universal and want to share that vision.

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

AG: I’m going to make that four. Humanity, humility, humor, and facility with language. I’m looking for characters who interact with others and are faced with moral dilemmas, I’m looking for gentle humor in a situation, and I want to feel secure that the writer loves language and knows how to use it. 

SQF: What most often turns you off to a submission?

AG: Attitude from either the writer or the character. If I sense either is smug, self-satisfied, violent, or hateful I won’t read any further. On a lighter note: I’m not happy about a lot of adjectives.

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

AG: Not very often. My reasons for rejection are usually too complicated, and I don’t have time to write an essay. Also, I don’t want to discourage someone, particularly if I think the work has a very good chance of being accepted elsewhere. But when the use of language is clearly nice or the topic of the work is fresh, I’ll try to say so and encourage the writer to submit again. So, I try to say something good when that something is simple or obvious.

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

AG: There are many clichéd subjects that I didn’t realize were overdone until I’d read hundreds of stories. Two examples are:  “The Unobtainable Woman/Man” and the “Thinking about Thinking”  story. I wrote a blog post listing the ones I see most often called “Common Tropes to Avoid." A universal story can be told in a fresh way; the trick is finding that unique and resonant angle. For myself, I have found that I need to stretch more: for the subject, the metaphors, the dialogue, the interactions. And to base the story on a strong emotional core. Just pulling imaginative stuff out of my head and lining it up in a pleasing or amusing form isn’t enough.

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

AG: What doesn’t bother you that might bother other editors?

I don’t really need a cover letter other than, “Thank you for considering my work [insert title here] for Star 82 Review.” I do want a third person bio that is 50-100 words, publication ready, so I don’t have to go hounding them for it later if I accept the work. I don’t care if they write to me personally, but if they do they should spell my name correctly. I generally ignore the cover letter until I’m done reading the work. I’m most interested in the work. The work should speak without explanation. I wrote two blog posts about these issues: Formatting Magazine Submissions & Cover Letters and Insecurity and the Third-Person Bio.

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

You are welcome! Thank you for asking a writer to write…

NEXT POST: 5/6--Six Questions for Leslie LaChance, Editor and Publisher, Mixitini Matrix: A Journal of Creative Collaboration