"Please Send One to Five Poems." How to Navigate Submission Batches

"Lit mags often encourage submitting more than one piece..."

Welcome to our weekly column offering perspectives on lit mag publishing, with contributions from readers, writers and editors around the world.

---

Let’s begin with a question: Do you like having your poems/stories published in sets by lit mags?

Lit mags often encourage submitting more than one piece in a submission. For poetry, it’s common for lit mags to suggest submissions of 3-5 poems. I’ve learned that this puts some poets/writers in a situation they would rather not be in.

Some writers prefer that a lit mag only accept one piece from their submission. Meanwhile, others are delighted if the editor takes the whole batch.

When I was younger, I was both more prolific and (unsurprisingly) wrote worse work. Perhaps this is why I felt excited when a lit mag would accept several poems at once from a submission. This meant I no longer had to keep spending time sending out those poems.

One thing I failed to consider is that each lit mag has a particular audience, and that audience is limited. Giving one journal an entire batch of poems might restrict writers more than they realize.

Why Do Lit Mags Encourage Submitting Batches?

There is no definitive answer.

Some editors may prefer to see a range of what the writer has to offer— especially if this is the first time this writer has submitted to the journal.

In a recent interview for Lit Mag News, Brian Mihok, Editor of matchbook, discusses this very issue. (Becky leans in on the subject which, I’d like to believe, has a little bit to do with the fact that we’ve been going back and forth for months on this subject while I rewrite draft after draft of this essay.)

Why do lit mags want to read multiple pieces when they only plan to accept one?

Brian does a good job of answering this question. He says it’s just fine for a writer to send a single piece to matchbook. But overall he sees publication as a collaboration. The writer and editor are going in together on a pact. In his mind, the editor, the writer, and the lit mag, all represent each other to varying degrees.

An important takeaway here is that reading more of a writer’s work gives editors the opportunity to better understand their style and ability. Seeing more work allows editors to draw inferences from the works that are not being accepted but which align with the types of work that an editor aims to platform.

The ability to have more work to consider can also be a way for the editor to gain a better understanding of the writer’s world and in turn aid in providing constructive feedback. That can strengthen the work the editor does accept and perhaps also help the writer craft submissions that are more aligned with a journal’s aesthetic in the future.

Is it Okay for Writers to Submit a Single Piece?

Once a writer has a good sense of what a lit mag publishes, then sending a targeted submission of a single piece that feels like a good fit for the journal is completely justifiable. That is, assuming, the lit mag will accept a single work for consideration.

For ONE ART, it was an intentional choice in the Submission Guidelines to encourage submissions of 1-5 poems. Five poems being a fairly standard max number. The allowance to submit a single poem is less common.

When I accept work for publication in ONE ART, I have started to be direct about asking if writers if they are ok with letting ONE ART have all the accepted poems. To clarify, I typically pop the question when I want to take more than three poems in a batch.

Not Just Poets & Poems

The number of works you include in a submission packet is not just a consideration for poetry journals. Writers of flash fiction or flash creative nonfiction (CNF) are often encouraged to send a few pieces in a submission. These writers may harbor similar preferences towards publishing, or not publishing, multiple pieces in the same journal at once.

I’m emphasizing at once because modern readers often view work online and, in many instances, on small devices. Readers are less likely to scroll through three flash stories, and writers know this.

When considering submission strategy, short fiction and nonfiction writers would do well to think a bit like poets. If you spread your work around to more lit mags, you can expand your audience. Further, publishers like to see that your work has appeared in numerous journals and are often not so thrilled to see that the lion’s share of your work has appeared in the same handful of lit mags.

This begs the question: why is work published in this fashion? The answer is not self-evident. I believe lit mags, generally speaking, have the best of intentions. When magazines overlook what is beneficial to their contributors the reasons probably have to do with time, lack of funding, tech issues, or all of the above. Another possibility is that this concern has not occurred to them at all.

Of course, some writers might love to have a handful of short works featured together. This can be especially true if the works speak to one another in a way that is meaningful. It’s also true if a writer has a large body of work and isn’t worried about putting all their pieces together in one basket, so to speak.

Lit Mag Design & Readership

Lit mag publishers who are reading this should take a moment to consider if the way they present work can be altered to improve accessibility, reader experience, benefits to contributors, and engagement.

I dislike ISSUU, Flipsnack, MagCloud (and other slideshow lit mag issue presentations), journal issues shared as PDFs, “creative” presentation choices where clicking through an issue is hard to figure out— like some kind of unnecessary and frustrating treasure hunt. Journals that adopt these methods of presentation are often the very same journals that have a tendency to publish ginormous issues that no one is going to read. We’re talking about 200-page digital issues where, if possible, in the best-case scenario, interested readers can “ctrl f” to find the pieces written by someone whose individual piece they are interested in.

I have a bone to pick with poorly designed haiku journals, too. Given the nature of haiku and other Japanese forms, the roots and intentions of the form, it's bizarre how many online haiku journals have very poor web design and shoddy presentation of poems. It’s antithetical to the concept of beauty inherent in these poetic forms.

Print haiku journals such as Modern Haiku and Akitsu Quarterly have terrific/minimalist design that makes perfect sense.

There are many online haiku journals that do have good presentation, and other lit mags could take a note from them. Creating a seamless and, dare I say, pleasurable virtual reading experience is essential if readers are going to engage with the work. Otherwise, they will be inclined to take their business elsewhere.

A pleasurable reading experience also means keeping your readers’ attention in mind. For ONE ART, I try to limit the amount of reading material published in a single day, and pair work as well as I can manage for reader value. Sometimes this means just publishing a single poem; sometimes it means publishing five poems that work together well enough to keep the reader engaged.

Writers want their work to get the time in the limelight that the work deserves. The reason ONE ART has, at times, published work by more than one poet on a single day due to an embarrassment of riches. Sometimes, we receive simply too much good work to pass up.

What is the Editor’s Responsibility?

It’s important to change with the times. A contemporary lit mag should update their Submission Guidelines accordingly.

Most editors are also writers so it should not be terribly difficult to consider a range of perspectives.

As an editor, you are a curator. This is true if you publish daily, monthly, quarterly, biannually, or annually. It’s true if you publish online or in print.

To best benefit writers, my view is that editors should let them spread their work around. This means leaving choices up to the writer. As a lit mag editor, I believe that part of our job is to help guide writers to make the best possible choices for their work and their careers.

What you can do is allow writers the opportunity to make choices that are right for them. This might mean that you only get to publish one or two of the works that were shared with you, even if your initial impulse is to hoard the entire submission for your journal.

When editors decline a submission, we’re quick to say that it’s not personal. On the flipside, the writer should be granted the same courtesy. Writers have their own agenda. It’s not personal if they decide to take their business, or part of their business, elsewhere.

Developing Relationships With Editors is a Good Idea for Writers

If an editor is not amenable to a writer withdrawing work that has been accepted, it’s true that the writer may run a risk of damaging the writer-editor relationship. This will not be the case with all editors. It’s certainly not the case for me. But some editors may feel slighted by your decision to only let them have some of the work that you offered in your submission. This could create friction the next time you send a submission.

Creating friction early in the writer-editor relationship could work against writers in the long-term. However, it behooves editors to be understanding in this process. While it’s invaluable for writers to cultivate strong relationships with writers, the reverse is also true. Once an editor finds a poet/writer whose work they love, maintaining a respectful relationship is also important.

For some time now, I’ve felt a shift in power dynamics in the literary world. Writers are grappling with their feelings about the need to appease gatekeepers when they can simply share their work online, directly with their readership. This is yet another reason I believe it’s urgent for lit mags to prioritize rapid responses to submissions, shortening (to the best of their ability) delays between acceptance and publication and courtesy toward writers wherever possible.

Editors Should Aim to Do What is Best for Writers

Imagine the following scenarios: A writer sends a lit mag editor a batch of poems and the editor selects several of the poems for publication in their journal. The writer then turns around and says “Actually, wait, I’d prefer you only take just one poem” or “I just heard from another lit mag and they want X poem. Do you mind if they take that poem and you can have the others you wished to publish?”

I’ve encountered variations on both scenarios countless times. From the editor’s position, the gut reactions might feel like something of a bait-and-switch. But that’s not really what’s going on. No one is in the wrong here. Both parties (editor and writer) have their own interests in mind.

When I accept a poem for ONE ART, it feels like I’ve captured a Pokémon. I know that sounds corny. What I mean is that editors can become a little possessive of the work they are sent and have the opportunity to publish. I’m emphasizing opportunity because it’s a privilege.

With all this in mind, I again encourage editors to avoid feeling slighted when they encounter a situation in the vein of the aforementioned scenario in which a writer decides to backpedal on work that has been accepted for publication. While an editor might be tempted to feel like a contractual agreement has been broken, in reality, there is no agreement that says work submitted to a lit mag and accepted instantly belongs to that lit mag.

Should Writers Offer Replacement Work?

If a lit mag accepts several pieces from your submission and you decide (for whatever reason) you only want to offer them part of the accepted work, is it ok to offer replacement material? To be honest, I’m not aware of any consensus on this matter.

In personal experience, when writers have withdrawn work from ONE ART and offered to let me look at additional poems I’ve said “Sure.” That said, the more typical scenario is for the writer to withdraw the work that they want to place elsewhere and leave ONE ART with the other work that was already accepted for publication (and I’m mostly fine with this).

Admittedly, it can be a bummer for the editor when the writer pulls your favorite accepted piece from a batch. On rare occasions, I’ve accepted a batch because I felt the poems worked well together and then later the poet informed me that they had to withdraw the poem that felt like the linchpin. I see two clear options. I should either inform the poet how I feel and return the whole selection of poems to them (which I’ve never done) or else suck it up and publish the other poems thus following through with my initial commitment.

In short, yes, I think it’s reasonable for writers to offer to send along additional work when they are withdrawing material. I would consider adding a note that indicates you have no expectations.

Spread and Develop

Poets and writers who aim to spread their work around to more lit mags are seeking a greater audience for their work, which is sensible. After all, more readership is something all writers crave. When you seek book publication, remember that publishers generally prefer to see that your work has appeared in a variety of markets as opposed to concentrated in just a select few.

Keeping the above in mind, there is good value in developing a relationship with editors by publishing with them intermittently over a number of years.

An editor who knows a writer’s work is less likely to accept “B” or “C” quality writing and, really, that’s a good thing. The writer should also be more driven to impress an editor with whom they have developed a relationship. Stakes are good, they make us all work harder.

An editor who has watched a writer’s career growth is more likely to be able to provide valuable feedback on submissions. A rejection from an editor who you’ve published with before is more valuable. It carries more weight. This editor has seen your work before and a rejection could be a sign that you need to put more time into the work.

Takeaway Reflections for Writers and Editors

If you are a prolific writer, maybe it will matter less to you if several of your pieces are scooped up by the same journal at once.

If you are less prolific and hope to have different audiences engage with your work, then it might make sense for you to spread your work around a little more and be less willing to give a lit mag multiple pieces from each submission.

Good editors should consider what is best for their contributors while also keeping in mind what is best for their magazine and readership.

---