Six Questions for Nathaniel Tower, Founder and Editor, Bartleby Snopes

Bartleby Snopes published its last issue in January, 2017. The archive remains online.

EDITOR'S NOTE: Nate provided the first set of responses for Six Questions For. . . posted on 12/1/2009. I offered him the opportunity to update his responses as SQF begins year three. Thanks to Nate and all the participating editors and publishers for a fun ride so far.


"Bartleby Snopes is an online literary magazine with several goals in mind. We want to publish the best new fiction we can find. We want to give the many writers out there an opportunity to publish their best work. We want to inspire you to create great works of fiction." The site publishes flash fiction to 1,200 words and longer fiction to 3,000 words.

Bartleby Snopes is currently accepting submissions for its latest project, Post-Experimentalism. We aren't really sure what it is yet, but it's something new and it's something amazing. It's really up to the writers to show us what it is. We plan to have our first issue out in the summer. It will be print and online and maybe even something else. 


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

NT: We want stories that are engaging, original, and fluid. Stories have to make us want to sit at a computer and read them straight through in one sitting, and when we're finished we should want to read them again. They need to tell a story, and that story needs to be compelling in some way. We don't want to see a story we've seen a million times before, and we want characters that are real but not boring or one-dimensional. The prose must pack a punch and pace itself in a way that makes the story smooth to read. The bottom line is that after we read a story we want to think, "I wish I had written this."


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

NT: If a story is disjointed, littered with backstory, or if it has no clear dramatic narrative or plot, then we will almost certainly reject it. A story has to actually contain a story. We don't want character sketches or sloppy expositions. We want pieces with beginning, middle and end. Stories with problems and some type of resolution. Stories filled with typos and stories that are too long will almost always be rejected as well. We are willing to work with authors if we like the story, but we're not looking to do total rebuilds.


SQF: Bartleby Snopes is different from other magazines in that the readers vote for the top story each month. How did you come up with this idea?

NT: I wanted to give the readers some voice in what goes in our semi-annual issues. I also wanted to get a sense of what types of readers we have and what types of stories our readers want to see. Bartleby Snopes has always been about doing things for the writers and the readers, so it made sense to get some input from the readers. The polls also help to attract new readers to the site every month, and they give the readers the satisfaction of knowing people have read and enjoyed their stories.


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

NT: Almost always. We give personal feedback about 99% of the time. One of the reasons I founded the magazine was because I was tired of the 6-month rejection that said "Sorry, this isn't for us." As a writer, I know how much time it takes to submit. Sometimes I think I spend more time submitting than writing. Because the writers take that time to look at our magazine and send something our way, I think they deserve that personal feedback. Again, the magazine is all about the writers and the readers, not about ourselves, so we do anything we can to help writers. Obviously we don't have all the answers, but we can at least give one perspective. This helps people know what to submit to us again in the future. And most people are grateful for the feedback we provide. At least most of the emails we get in response suggest that people are.


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

NT: Just how subjective it all is. I've gotten pieces that I thought were brilliant that resulted in reader backlash. I've lost readers because of the stories we've published and the stories we've nominated for awards like Pushcart and Best of the Net (but we've gained a lot more than we've lost). At the same time, I've gotten stories that I could barely finish that I would never publish, and some of these stories have ended up in some fairly prestigious places. I think we publish great stories, and there are a lot of good stories that we don't publish because they just don't fit. But it really is all just a matter of opinion (at least most of the time—I do occasionally get writing that I think is objectively bad and really unpublishable). No one should ever take rejection personally. There is a market out there for just about everything. Being an editor has helped me take rejection better.

I also have learned that the writing community, in general, is a group of welcoming and grateful and kind individuals. People are so thankful when their stories are published, but it's more impressive how thankful people can be when their stories are rejected. People really get excited about the publications of others, and there are a lot of good friendships created between readers and editors.


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

NT: What are the future plans of Bartleby Snopes? Have you ever considered shutting it down?

I actually was strongly considering closing the publication to submissions indefinitely. It was just getting to be too much time and work. As most writers know, most of these magazines are just side things that produce no profits. There are quite a few magazines that start as one-person shows, but as the magazine grows and gets more popular, it becomes nearly impossible to do it alone.  That's why I brought Rick Taliaferro on board as our Associate Editor and our "Long" Fiction guru. Even with him it's still a lot of work, and sometimes I wonder how much longer I can do it. But I enjoy it too much to give it up now. I feel like we've contributed something to the writing community, and I feel like the magazine has made me a better reader and a better writer (I've also learned some programming skills and other things as well). As for the future, the magazine will continue to do everything it's doing now (Story of the Month, two stories per week, Semi-Annual issues in PDF and print format, Dialogue Contest, etc.). I'd also like to develop a few more projects. I'd like to launch some more print stuff. In particular, we've got this idea for flash novellas that we will hopefully launch this coming year. What will it look like? I guess you will just have to keep visiting Bartleby Snopes to find out.

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

NEXT POST: 2/6--Six Questions for Becky Tuch, Founding Editor, The Review Review

Six Questions for Nathaniel Tower, Founder and Editor, Bartleby Snopes

Bartleby Snopes is an online literary magazine that hopes "to inspire writers to create great works of fiction." The magazine publishes two stories a week and concludes each thirty day cycle with a Story of the Month contest. The editors are interested in unpublished fiction up to 4000 words. Most recent stories have been in the 500 to 2500 range. 

(ceased publication)


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

NT: We want an original story with a strong voice and a realistic/compelling character. This is a competitive industry with many new journals appearing each week. If the stories we publish seem bland, people are going to turn away from our magazine. The characters and language and plots either need to be things we haven't seen before, or they need to be old things presented in new ways. As an online magazine, we know that our readers are sitting at their computers when they read, so we know that the story has to engage the reader from beginning to end. If the voice is weak or if the plot is loose or if the character is unrelatable, then the reader is going to move on to another source to get that fiction fix. In the end, the most important thing is that the story is something that I would want to read again. If I don't want to read it again or if I feel like I've gotten everything out of it after one read, we're probably going to let it go.


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

NT: Inconsistent voice, underdeveloped or forced characters, and lack of pacing. Stories need to be fluid in order to keep our attention, and we want characters that we feel will resonate with the readers. I see many stories with choppy section breaks or poor transitions that seem to suggest the author didn't really know where to go with the story or how to bring it to an end. Many authors will focus so much on the prose or the plot that the characters will feel empty, and just as many will force so much development upon the character that he/she/it will feel unnatural. Stories need to have a fine balance when it comes to language, plot and characters. A piece of fiction needs to have life so that it can feel like a real story rather than just something that somebody wrote.


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

NT: Obviously it is a turn off when someone blatantly disregards our guidelines. We aren't too picky about formatting, but we are turned off by submissions that look sloppy. Errors in punctuation, especially in the punctuation of dialogue, drive us nuts. Authors need to make sure that their stories are publication-ready before submitting them. We're also turned off by stories written in third person present tense. Most of the time this narrative style just doesn't work.


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

NT: I almost always include comments regarding why I've rejected a story. These comments sometimes get very lengthy depending on how strong the submission is. I also tend to lengthen the feedback for writers who have submitted to us in the past. As a writer, I know how much time it takes to send pieces out to publishers, and I think writers deserve to know that their story was actually read by a human. In general I try to give the writer a sense of why I didn't accept the piece. I've received a lot of supportive feedback from this, but also a bit of backlash. I receive many emails each day thanking me for my "insightful" comments. Occasionally though, I'll get an email criticizing my reasons for rejection. Of course nothing I say is ever meant to be taken personally. Ultimately, it's really just a matter of personal taste.


SQF: I read a comment by one editor who said she keeps a blacklist of authors who respond to a rejection in a less than professional manner. I'm sure you know what I mean. What do you want authors to know about the stories 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?

NT: I am definitely open to questions and comments from authors. I typically don't take these comments personally, and I definitely enjoy having open communications with authors. We have no blacklist, but we do get a little annoyed when authors continuously submit pieces that don't follow our submission guidelines, or when authors continue to submit work that has the same "flaws" as a piece we've just rejected.

When we reject a piece, we're happy to receive a follow-up email, whether it thanks us or blasts us. Either way, we typically don't respond to these emails, mostly because of time constraints. If an author has a specific question about something, we'll do our best to get back to him or her. Authors need to understand that even though we send personalized rejection letters, rejection isn't meant to be taken personally.


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

NT: Why did you decide to start this magazine?

I started this magazine because I was tired of waiting for responses from editors/magazines who treated the author like he or she didn't matter. I wanted to create a magazine that was friendly to the author and the reader. I'm not in this to make money (and I don't make any doing it either). I'm here to share great fiction with the world. Authors put so much time and energy into their work. They don't need to wait six months to hear that their story "was one of many received" and "not right for the magazine."


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

Next Post: 12/07 -- Six Questions for Don Webb, Managing Editor, Bewildering Stories