Six Questions for Jen Webb, Editor, Meniscus Literary Journal

Meniscus publishes poetry, flash fiction to 500 words, and prose to 3,000 words. “Meniscus is named for the curve that forms at the top surface of a container of liquid. The curve is caused by surface tension, which not only holds the fluid in, but also allows the passage of objects through the surface. It creates uncertainty for anyone attempting a precise measurement because of the parallax effect. The combination of tension, openness and uncertainty can be read as an analogy for creative writing.” Read the complete guidelines here.

SQF: How did you come to be a part of Meniscus?

Jen Webb: I am a part of the executive of the Australasian Association of Writing Programs (AAWP), and about a decade ago some members began suggesting that this organisation expand its publishing beyond the scholarly journal TEXT (textjournal.com.au) to a literary journal. Since I was then on the publishing subcommittee of the AAWP, I followed up this suggestion with my fellow sub-committee members, and we launched the first issue in 2013.


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

JW:

1. A fresh approach; a ‘well made’ poem or story that doesn’t introduce a fresh way of narrating, structuring, organising etc doesn’t particularly interest us. Go beyond the initial impulse to write about a particular topic or idea, and see where that takes you (ideally, it takes the story out of the ordinary, the ‘already-known’, the obvious, the easy mark).
2. The quality of the writing; we don’t mind in the least if your syntax is experimental, but you need to be in control of the lines, phrases, sentences. Read your work out loud; listen to the rhythms; proofread it carefully; have a beta reader who can read it for you and give you feedback before you submit it.
3. The ‘voice’ of the piece. Is it credible? Does it capture my attention? Is this a voice I want to hear more of, to spend time with?

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

JW: Poorly written work; work that is clichéd, or obvious; over-elaborated work that has unnecessary flourishes or complexities; work that relies too much on a joke or twist; work that is didactic; work that promulgates racism or sexism, or that uses such -isms without thought, nuance or critical engagement.



SQF: What do you look for in the opening paragraph(s)/stanza(s) of a submission?

JW: We respond to writing that is of quality in terms of style, voice, content and approach; an opening line that literally opens up the piece; if in addition  but we are also open to experimental writing, even if it doesn’t entirely work.


SQF: Many editors list erotica, or sex for sex sake, as hard sells. What are hard sells for your publication?

JW: Hard sell: I take it by this you mean it is hard for writers to ‘sell’ it to the editors. For us, it’s any work that matches the criteria above about what ‘turns me off’ in a submission. We are relaxed about content and form; we just want the writing to be good / engaging / surprising / experimenting / thoughtful / consoling / etc


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