Six Questions for Jeff Georgeson, Managing Editor, Penumbric Speculative Fiction Magazine

“Penumbric generally accepts submissions in the following categories: fiction, poetry, illustration, graphic narrative, animation, music, or combinations of these (e.g., a spoken-word version of a poem). If you have something that fits some other category that can be displayed to advantage on the web, try me; I'll take a look.” Read the complete guidelines here.

SQF: Some readers may recognize the name Penumbric from the early 2000s. I do. Why did you decide to reincarnate this magazine?

Jeff Georgeson: That’s absolutely awesome that you remember it! I reincarnated it because I really missed the magazine. I've worked in publishing in some way pretty much since 8th grade when I worked on my grandmother's small-town weekly newspaper, so no matter how many other projects/fields I've been involved in, there’s always an element of writing/publishing. My proofreading work has lightened up somewhat as my long-term clients have retired or moved on to other things, so I finally had the time to begin Penumbric again.

Beyond that, I really want to do something to help authors and artists—especially diverse authors and artists, and diverse viewpoints—get their work out in front of people. As Penumbric grows, hopefully it can provide a larger platform for them.

Also, I hate all the advertising that ruins one’s experience of most websites these days. I wanted to build something that didn’t have any of that, or any sort of paywall keeping readers away from authors. It’s my job to present authors’ work to readers, not make a quick buck off of clickbait.

And then there’s the selfish bit—I really enjoy putting together the magazine and doing interviews and writing articles and reading and … just learning about things! I hope that comes across in the publication itself.

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

JG: If it’s a written work, that it’s well-crafted, that it says something about the world around us even if it’s set in worlds that have never been, and that it is, in some way, edgy fantasy, horror, and/or science fiction.

By well-crafted I mean more than just proofread—although that is important! The flow, the word choice, the structure, etc. should all work together to create something amazing. Overall, it should be a complete work. I’m not saying it has to have a clear beginning, middle, and end; it just needs to feel complete, somehow. Too often I receive work that’s quite good but feels like a chapter or a scene in a really interesting larger story that hasn’t been given to me.

When I say “about the world around us,” I don’t mean that quite as literally as it sounds. Your work can be about general political ideologies, for example, but I generally wouldn’t want it to be about specific current politicians. 

And “edgy” can be so many things, I don’t want to limit it by giving a definition.

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

JG: Works that are overtly sexual to the point of being pornographic. This hasn’t been much of an issue for this version of Penumbric, but in the old times we started getting a lot of subs that confused “edgy” with “lots of sex—and then more sex.” (So, yes, I guess I am limiting “edgy” just a bit.)

Other than that, work that displays little awareness of different cultures or relies on cultural stereotypes is a no-go.

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

JG: That old trope, “It has to grab me!” If my attention is wandering that quickly, if I’m thinking about the laundry I have to do and what I want for dinner, the sub will have to be that much more brilliant the rest of the way to win me back. And that’s difficult to do.

If yours is the tenth 5,000-word story I’ve read today, what can you do to wake me up, to make me laugh or cry and really care about the words you’ve written, the characters you’ve conjured, the story you’ve felt compelled to tell? If you can do that, then I’m a lucky editor.

SQF: Are there certain types of submissions you’d like to see more of in your slush pile?

JG: That’s a difficult one; we’ve received such a broad range of work already. Really it’s art that we’ve always had less of in terms of submissions. It’d be great to see more animated art as well!

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

JG: Do you give commentary on why you rejected a submission? Yes, we do! We don’t send it right along when we first send a rejection, as that seems a bit presumptive, and some authors don’t want my opinion about their story/poem, which is fair enough. But we’re happy to give feedback, even if most of the time it’s not a line-by-line critique but rather a few pointers in what we feel is the right direction.

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

Six Questions for Charlie Fish, Editor, Fiction on the Web

Fiction on the Web publishes fiction of 1,000 to 10,000 words. The editor wants funny stories, creepy stories, fantastic stories, futuristic stories, criminal stories, real life stories, and more. Read the complete guidelines here.

SQF: Why did you start this magazine?

Charlie Fish: I started waaay back in 1996, when the World Wide Web was brand new. (Remember Netscape and AltaVista? Anyone?) I wanted to use this new medium to create a platform for short stories, both my own and other people's. At the time, there were only a few dozen similar websites, and most of them were genre-specific. We all linked to each other and helped promote the idea that the web was a great place to find fiction.

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

• Beginning, middle and end.

• Insight into a different culture, environment, lifestyle, job, world...

• Makes me feel, inspires me.

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

CF: Too short or too long. Unsatisfying ending. Lots of editing required (SPaG, yes, but more often weird formatting that can take an age to untangle).

Cliché. Above all, cliché.

Vampires are usually a bad sign. As are jokes. Flash fiction where the protagonist dies at the end. Philosophical tracts with no real characters. Stories that are dialogue-only. Stories set in one room. Stories that are confusing. Nevertheless, I read every submission because the exceptions can be especially delightful.

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

CF: A sense of place, strong characterisations, and a hook to keep me reading.

SQF: Are there particular types/genre of stories you'd like to see more of in your slush pile?

CF: I publish a lot of mainstream/literary fiction, but I have a big soft spot for genre fiction—especially sci fi, but also horror and sword-and-sorcery fantasy. I will always welcome original takes on those.

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

CF: What makes your magazine stand out?

Fiction on the Web is the longest-running short stories website on the Internet. But the thing I'm proudest of is that every single story published gets comments from readers. I'm so grateful to my community of readers and commenters for keeping the website alive.

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

Six Questions for Kyle Diduck and Jay Miller, editors of The Lit Quarterly

The Lit Quarterly seeks to maintain a platform for the free expression of ideas through creative writing. The Lit Quarterly publishes short fiction of 1,000-5,000 words, verse poetry of 12-40 lines (preferred), and non-fiction essays of 1,500-5,000 words. See guidelines for preferred topics.

(Ceased publication)

 

SQF: Why did you start this magazine?

 

Kyle Diduck: I started the magazine primarily as a motivator for myself and others to see our writing through. By putting together a magazine that would be published in hard copy, and by paying the writers, I hoped to encourage them to further develop the works that, in some cases, they’ve been casually working on for years. I also hope to curate a space where free and open exchange of ideas can occur through creative writing. A lot of publications, and the industry at large, can be notoriously stifling to challenging, original, or contrarian ideas, which narrows the scope of discussion for everyone.

 

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

 

KD: Firstly, a work should be engaging and plausible, subtle and insightful. This is a lot to ask, but I think the best writing occurs when the author finds a balance between these four things. Secondly, I look for works that challenge readers by going against the orthodoxy and sensibilities of modern readers—this isn’t a requirement, but they capture my attention much more strongly.

 

Jay Miller: Bold style, original expression, dénouement. Like Kyle says, it seems like a lot to ask to me, too, although perhaps only because I can’t seem to achieve it often enough in my own writing. Fortunately for us, we get a lot of ingenuous material throughout the year. We never have a problem filling the pages.

 

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

 

KD: If a work is obviously a rough first-draft, spilled upon the page. Also, if a work tries to make broad, definitive declarations about the reality of the universe without justification, context, or nuance.

 

JM: We’re all on the same team here. I try to be brief in commentary with things I don’t like. I try not to hold onto, from piece to piece, what turns me off about a submission, but I maintain a standard procedure when approaching a new work: does this remind me of anything? If yes, is it a new take or a bona fide rehash? If no, is it something I think I could learn something from editing? If yes, I pour my heart into it; if no, I continue my editorial catechism until something results in a flowchart yes/no. Entrusted with people’s work, I enjoy challenging myself as a potential editor of their pieces, then as a hands-on kind of guy, I redline the hell out of everything with my suggestions, diagnostic questions, fact-checking, allusions, etc., hoping not to impose myself beyond reason. I really want contributors to know I’m working for them, so if I can’t see myself getting into the weeds with them, I don’t want to make my job their problem and I tell myself no.

 

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

 

KD: I look for a voice/perspective that I can sympathize with, whether this be the protagonist or the narrator. I don’t have much sympathy for characters who wallow in victimhood or oppression, or whose identity is hinged on those things.

 

JM: Like pop music, the hook has to connect, it's gotta be hot. There has to be sparks. If it doesn't jive, it doesn't click, it doesn't pull the reader in, even momentarily, it's gonna be a hard sell.

 

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

 

KD: Science-fiction, fantasy, and other specific genres of fiction are hard sells for me. Plausibility in a story is great bedrock on which to establish meaningful characters and plots. It’s difficult to engage with human problems while keeping everything realistic, but I like seeing how contributors try to overcome this challenge. (Note: in the past, we have published works that contained elements of sci-fi and fantasy, but those elements were not the defining features of the stories).

 

JM: I love it all. Big fan of sex in literature (Sade, Ellis, Nin), and I remain partial to much sci-fi and fantasy (Judy Merril, Isaac Asimov, Eoin Colfer). Hard sells for me are… Artaud said it best: “enough of these poems that only end up benefitting those who make them more than those who read them!” I’m not suggesting you need to become a master of astrophysics and botany to compose original poetry, but it certainly doesn’t hurt to know what’s original and what’s been done to death. There’s a lot that hasn’t been written yet, there’s a lot left to be said.

 

SQF: What kind of submissions would you like to see more of?

 

KD: I would like to see more essays addressing aspects of society that have emerged very recently. The last fifteen years has seen rapid changes in social interactions, warped political paradigms, new and changing ideologies, and unbridled technological changes, and I would love to see original and insightful discussions on these topics for our non-fiction section.

 

JM: Generally speaking, we want to use our platform to publish stuff we don’t think would easily find its way to the light of day without us. Bombastic and full of facts. Like every 3 months we get an essay or two absolutely laden with facts. I love those. They’re precious to me. When they’re full of things you know, maybe only peripherally, or very obviously not at all, and you look everything up one-by-one and realize this whole crossword of paragraphs is spelling out one very unique, tangible idea. That, but fiction.

 

SQF: Are there certain topics/subject matter that the writer should avoid?

 

KD: No. Any topic is acceptable if it’s executed properly.

 

JM:  No, not with us. We don’t go out of our ways to shout it from the rooftops but we really dig true grit, stories about mental health, sexuality, mature themes, etc.; but we won’t workshop or proceed with anything that isn’t done tastefully. Every now and then, we agree to print something because it simply delights the sense to read. 

 

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

 

KD: “What are some of the main challenges of processing submissions for a magazine such as yours?” Answer: one difficulty is finding a way to reject an author’s submission without being discouraging. Oftentimes, whether I can articulate it properly or not, the work just hasn’t yet reached the place where it’s bound.

 

JM: “What impact do we hope to have with the magazine?” Our answer: we hope to leave people with something to remember. We’re young, too, and this is just the beginning of our careers as writers.

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