KYSO Flash publishes fiction,
nonfiction, poetry, and hybrid forms, up to 1,000 words (including the title).
(ceased publication)
SQF: Why did you start
this journal?
Clare MacQueen:
1. Because I adore flash
literature, especially micro-fictions and prose poems.
2. Because I wanted to
compensate authors financially for rights to publish their creations of flash
literature.
KYSO Flash is an independent
publication, funded thus far from my personal resources. Although my pockets
are tiny, even a token amount like $30-$60 per original piece (depending on
word count) is considered a “pro” rate, and makes me feel as if I’m making at
least a small difference.
3. Because I’m not getting
any younger!
Last
spring, I felt compelled to pour the energies that I still have into creating
something that both my daughter and my mother, as voracious readers with an
artistic bent, might appreciate were they both still alive. For years, I had a
nebulous hope of someday publishing my daughter’s writing and art, but she
passed away suddenly four years ago in July.
I
think it was Harry Polkinhorn, former director of the San Diego State
University Press, who first gave me the idea of running a press. Two decades
ago, I took his graduate-level course in literary editing and publishing at
SDSU. We students set up a press, brainstormed our first project, and then
created and published a 157-page anthology of fiction, nonfiction, poetry, and
visual art—in about four months. That we managed to do so still amazes me.
Although
the course was intense and demanding, it was work that suited me, especially
the editing, formatting, and book design. I got involved in most aspects of the
book’s production, except for marketing (which has never been my strong suit).
My
enthusiasm and work ethic impressed Harry, and the following semester he asked
me to keep the student enterprise running, which was named aptly enough “Hard
Pressed Press.” But by then, after many years of drought and economic downturn
in California, my plans were set on moving to Seattle. (Where daily drizzle was
heavenly, at least for the first ten years of my stay.)
SQF: What are the top
three things you look for in a submission and why?
CM:
1. Number One: That the
author or artist has made the effort to follow our guidelines, which tells us
that he or she respects and takes seriously our publication, and our time.
Our
guidelines are detailed and freely available online. In particular, our
formatting guidelines are designed to help save us time and to simplify our job
of creating a quality online publication to showcase the work of our contributors.
If they cannot be bothered to read and follow guidelines, then why should we spend
valuable time and resources to consider their work?
2. Our holy grail is this: We’re
looking to publish literature that knocks our socks off. Ideally then, the writing should grab attention from
the beginning: that is, with the title. Or at least with the first sentence, to
make readers want to continue reading.
Whatever
the genre, I read flash submissions all the way to the end, even if my interest
wavers. However, I note how many times that happens, as well as any “bumps in
the road” such as tortured syntax, or typos, or grammar mistakes that distract
from the flow. If I find only a couple such red flags, and if the rest of the
piece is promising, then I might suggest specific revisions to the author.
3. As one who especially
enjoys prose poems, I appreciate lyrical language, even in fiction and
nonfiction pieces. Plus, I ask myself these questions: Does the work resonate
for me? Does it elicit emotion? Where’s the pain? Where’s the joy? Does the
last line linger in my mind?
If
not, then what’s the tradeoff that makes me want to publish the piece?
SQF: What most often
turns you off to a submission?
CM:
1. Number One: When it’s
obvious the author or artist has not read our journal, either the specific formatting
guidelines or the works we publish. Unfortunately, even the small payments
offered for publishing rights seem to attract “scatter-shot” submissions of
work that’s inappropriate for KYSO Flash.
2. Gratuitous use of clichés,
violence, and demeaning and/or obscene language. Four-letter words are fine, when
used appropriately and sparingly—however, their overuse weakens the work.
3. Unpolished, or even
sloppy work with run-on sentences, typos, grammar mistakes, awkward syntax,
etc. While it’s true that KYSO Flash
is an edited publication, it’s the author’s job to rewrite and revise until the
piece shines.
And
I’m impressed with fellow writers who are unafraid to hyphenate compound
adjectives, who understand the importance of the Oxford comma, and who realize,
despite Kurt Vonnegut’s disdain, that the semi-colon is actually our friend.
After all, Vonnegut was referring to the use of discretionary semi-colons in order to combine, say, three brief
sentences into one longer sentence that flows better. He preferred the short
sentences to stand on their own. But what worked for Vonnegut’s terse style
does not necessarily work for every writer.
SQF: Do you provide
comments when you reject a submission?
CM: Typically, we’re too
pressed for time to include comments when we decline work.
However, if we’re interested in publishing a
piece, but believe that it needs more polishing or that it’s close-but-not-quite-there
for whatever reason, then I will personally email the author to offer feedback
and specific suggestions for revisions.
Of course, the author is free to decline our
suggestions—and choosing not to revise is a legitimate option! Even so, I would
appreciate the professional courtesy of a reply within a few days, so that we
can close our Submittable file on that piece and move on to the next one.
Ignoring my email is rude and leads me to conclude that the person is immature
and unprofessional. Which means I’m likely to decline any future submissions
from that author.
My motto: If at all possible, burn no bridges!
Even through neglect. After all, it takes less than a minute to write a simple
note of acknowledgment: “Dear Clare, Thank you for your time and suggestions,
but I’ll pass. Best regards, J. Doe”
And yes, it’s important to address an editor by
name, especially when they’ve taken the time to write to an author personally. And
especially if they’ve shown the author the courtesy and respect of addressing him
or her by name. After all, editors are people, too, and often they’re hardworking
writers. I imagine very few people want to be treated as a nameless, faceless
object floating in cyberspace.
SQF: Is there a
particular genre or theme that you’d like to see more submissions of, or conversely, that you see too often?
CM:
1. We would like to see lots
of spiritual flash pieces such as Brian Doyle’s “Joyous Voladoras” and Dana
Tierney’s “Coveting Luke’s Faith,” both of which appear in The Best American Spiritual Writing 2005.
And
I would love to see more submissions from women writers and artists!
Unfortunately,
women generally tend to take rejection of their work so personally that after
the first time, some may never submit another piece anywhere. As a woman writer
myself, I can understand this to a degree. But as an editor, I realize that
rejections are not personal.
There
could be a whole range of reasons that the work was declined. Maybe it wasn’t
that particular editor’s cup of tea—and, no matter how strongly an editor
professes to be objective, it simply ain’t so! An editor’s opinion is
subjective and often idiosyncratic. Or maybe the declined piece wasn’t right
for that particular publication on that particular day. Ask the same editor a
week later, and he or she might see things differently, depending on the time
of day and how rested and hydrated he or she feels.
I
like to use this shopping analogy to reframe “rejection”: Let’s say I’m bored
with a pair of my jeans and want a different style. I may visit several stores
and try on 20 pairs before finding just the right one to suit me. But that says
nothing about the quality and merit of the other jeans that I “rejected.” In
fact, those I decided not to buy could be of better quality, but they were
simply not for me. Maybe the fabric wasn’t soft enough. Or maybe the thread
color of the seams didn’t match my favorite blouse. Or maybe they just didn’t
fit me right that day. Whatever my reasons, wouldn’t it be strange if the
clothing companies took my decisions personally and never tried to sell another
pair of jeans?
2. Please, no more previously
published works being passed off as original.
If
a piece has appeared in a small magazine of limited circulation, on an author’s
website, in a blog, on social media such as Facebook, or at sites such as Fictionaut, then from legal and ethical
viewpoints, first publishing rights are no longer available.
And
although we do personally solicit selected works for republishing, we do not
offer payment for reprint rights.
By
the way, we research publication history of original pieces before sending
payment. This is because we discovered that a few writers had committed fraud
by signing our contract, attesting that their work had never been published. I
find this both distressing and interesting: that the introduction of even a
small amount of money into the publishing equation—thirty dollars for the
shortest pieces—can induce some people to commit petty theft!
SQF: What one question
on this topic do you wish I'd asked that I didn't? And how would you answer it?
CM: “How do you respond to
writers who say they don’t have time to read the works of other writers?”
If these are the same writers who make time each
evening to veg out in front of a huge-screen TV for hours, watching games and
mindlessly munching popcorn, then I say their priorities are skewed. Even
accomplished writers take time to read the works of other writers. And they
didn’t become accomplished writers by lounging in front of a TV!
To use a sports analogy: In addition to regular
physical and mental work-outs and practicing their moves on the court or on the
field, professional athletes also watch how their teammates as well as their
opponents play the game, in part to analyze their own performances and to see
how they can improve. And, in concert with advice from their coaches, to
develop strategies to help their team win consistently.
Of course, the same principle applies to
individual athletes. And to individual writers, especially early to mid-career.
Beyond having your own master author at your beck and call to critique your
manuscripts and to coach you along, the best way to learn what works in writing
and what doesn’t, is to read and analyze the writings of others. Voraciously,
in fact! And widely. Figure out their strategies and which tools in the
writer’s toolkit they used to create particular effects.
Even experienced writers would be wise to keep
up with what their peers are doing—if only to ensure they’re not producing essentially
the same story an editor has read 27 versions of this week alone.
Thanks so much to Jim Harrington for asking
these questions! As requested, I’ve provided answers “in excruciating detail.”
:-) I do hope that folks will find my answers informative and useful. And we
look forward to reading your submissions to KYSO
Flash.
Thank you, Clare. We all
appreciate you taking time from your busy schedule to participate in this
project.
No comments:
Post a Comment