Do Editors Actually Read the Slush Pile?

A look behind the scenes at a whole lot of lit mags

Recently I had a question: Do editors actually read work from the slush pile?

For anyone who does not know, the “slush pile” refers to work that is submitted over the transom. It is work that has not been specifically solicited by editors. The submitters might be known to the editors or they might not be. They might be well along in their careers with multiple publishing credits or they might be brand new to sending work out. Nonetheless, writers in the “slush pile” are writers submitting work all the same way, through a magazine’s submission software or regular mail.

I began to ask myself this question about the slush pile upon hearing about many friends who had editors reach out to them and request work, which then was accepted for publication. Now, let me be clear: I don’t object to this practice. Editors have every right to seek out the writers they are particularly excited by. And soliciting work can often ensure a magazine displays a wider array of writers and writing styles. If an editor loves a writer’s work, why wouldn’t they seek to showcase that writer, particularly if it’s an unknown voice whom the editor feels strongly needs to be out in the world?

Nonetheless, in thinking about this process, I also wondered about access. How do editors meet the writers they wish to showcase? At conferences, writing programs, residencies, parties, readings and so on. What, then, about those writers who don’t have access to such things? Writers who cannot afford writing programs, who are taking care of kids at home instead of attending readings, whose multiple jobs prohibit them from attending conferences? Are the writers without access and connections being sidelined in the submission process? If literary magazines are mostly publishing work from writers they’ve met personally, how fair is the process to writers who, for whatever reason, have been unable to make themselves personally known?

In short, are writers whose work lands in the slush pile getting a fair shake from the magazines they long to publish in?

So, I asked around. The answers I received, from dozens of editors, truly surprised me. I am immensely grateful to the editors who took the time to make their processes a bit more transparent.

I hope these replies help illuminate what goes on behind the scenes at many magazines. Most importantly, I hope they give an added boost of encouragement to every one of you working hard to get your work out into the world.

Here is what they said:

Jon McConnell, former Editor, Split Lip Magazine:

I edited the fiction for Split Lip Magazine for several years, and solicited a few pieces as I came on board (maybe 5 or so took me up on it?), but after that it was all from the slush pile. I had sole control of the fiction output, and my thought on diversity was "if you organically build your network and make an effort to publish diverse work, the makuep of the slush pile will eventually reflect that."

Roel Umali Hernandez, Editor, The Ugly Writers:

At The Ugly Writers, we are non-profit and non-paying. Any expenditures came from the slush fund aka my pocket. But seeing unknown writers and closet poets build the confidence in submitting and publishing their work on our humble site is a return of my investment…

Henry Bell, Editor, Gutter Magazine:

At Gutter Magazine we solicit around 6 pieces of work per issue, and the other 50 or so are from open submissions. 

Wendy Wimmer Schuchart, former Editor, Witness:

I worked for Witness until [recently]. Probably 95% from submissions (we didn’t call it a slush pile) but most issues were 100%. We only solicited if the issue was incomplete once we’d read everything.

Joe Baumann, Editor, Gateway Literary Review:

At Gateway Literary Review, we have only ever had, I think, two solicited pieces. Everything else comes from the Submittable queue. We use a voting system for first round, whose requirements to get to the final round is dependent on number of editorial assistants. We then establish how much work we want in the issue and make decisions from there.

Donna Talarico-Beerman, Editor, Hippocampus Magazine:

All voting from our queue, and a blind reading process for the first round(s). No soliciting.

Todd Kaneko, former Editor, Waxwing:

When I was co-editing the poetry section at Waxwing, we weren’t doing a lot of solicited poems. Maybe one poet per issue and those largely came from old solicitations that went out a long time ago, or from writers we were interviewing and wanted work to accompany the interview. And generally speaking, the solicitations that we did do were in support of our mission about diversity and inclusion. But also, after “Good Bones” went viral, we were blessed with a very robust submission queue that often felt like we were getting the kind of work we would have solicited anyways, both in terms of poet name and poem quality.

Barbara Westwood Diehl, Editor, Baltimore Review:

We've encouraged a few writers over the years to submit their work, but pretty much everything we've published has come through the Submittable queue (9,000-10,000 submissions/year).

Lena Valencia, Editor, One Story:

This varies year to year at One Story but usually it's about 60-70% from the slush. Many people we end up publishing have submitted to us via slush several times and have gotten on the radar of an editor, which is why I always tell writers to take encouraging rejections (especially personalized rejections) seriously and not just to assume that an editor is being polite. If we say we want to read more of your work, we actually want to read more of your work!

Richard Peabody, Editor, Gargoyle:

If I print 100 poets/writers in an issue I believe 10-15 from the slush on average these days. Because issues are larger. In the early days it was more like 1-5 per issue…Partly cuz after 40+ years I know a ton of people.

Sarah Anne Strickley, Editor, Miracle Monocle:

At Miracle Monocle we are committed to pulling at least half of each issue from unsolicited submissions but it usually winds up being far more than half. We don’t charge for submissions and we offer entry-fee free competitions every year. The idea is to remove as many barriers as possible for prospective contributors.

Jill Gerard, Editor, Chautauqua:

Chautauqua takes over 95% and often 100% from open submissions.

Noel Pabillo Mariano, Editor, Shark Reef:

I’m the CMF editor at Shark Reef and a solid 95% comes from our slush pile. Very rarely do we solicit in the time I’ve been on staff.

George David Clark, Editor, 32 Poems:

Most issues of 32 Poems are 100% unsolicited submissions, but if we get to our deadline with two or three spots left to fill, we solicit only after we’re caught up on our “slush” reading.

Neil Aitken, Editor, Boxcar Poetry Review:

Boxcar Poetry Review is 100% unsolicited submissions. Even if I encourage someone to send us poems, I always tell them there's no guarantee that we'll be taking it. I co-edited another journal many many years ago that did solicit work -- and I hated the experience (we got burned with some third-drawer mediocre work from better-known names).

Susan Solomon, Editor, Sleet Magazine:

At Sleet Magazine, pretty much everything we show comes from writers who submit to our open calls. We pride ourselves on being democratic, discerning and writer-friendly.

James Ducat, Editor, MUSE literary journal:

MUSE literary journal publishes only unsolicited poetry, fiction, and creative nonfiction.

Dave Housley, Editor, Barrelhouse:

At Barrelhouse I think it's around 90% total through open submissions, with the solicited work over the past few years mostly being special online issues that were guest edited and for which those editors reached out to folks in certain communities.

Sherri Hoffman, former Editor, Cream City Review:

I was the fiction editor at Cream City Review, and 90% of fiction for each issue came from the slush pile. It was a task to pull the best from often hundreds of submissions, and we had a pool of readers plus the final editing team, so selections went through two levels of reading. Only one of our anniversary issues was deliberately commissioned as we brought back authors who had been published over the history of the journal.

Tobi Alfier, Editor, San Pedro River Review:

Occasionally we have a feature poet at San Pedro River Review. That means we print about five of their poems all in the beginning, they get an expanded bio, and their name and picture on the front. Other than that, all our work comes from submissions. We're very proud and privileged to publish all of them!

Leslie Jill Patterson, Editor, Iron Horse Literary Review:

96 percent of Iron Horse comes from the slush pile. Occasionally, we take a manuscript we heard a writer present at a conference or we meet writers at conferences or find them in other journals and ask them to submit. But almost everything comes from the slush pile.

Matthew Silverman, former Editor, Blue Lyra Review:

When I was at Blue Lyra Review, it was all "slush". I think your question might be more geared for the big mags like New Yorker and so forth. Smaller journals are all about the Slush. But I did request work from writers I like like Marge Percy and others, and about half sent something along!

Joe Kane, former Editor, Midwestern Gothic:

When I was a copy editor at Midwestern Gothic 100% of the work came from the slush pile.

Kelly Harrison, Editor, West Trade Review:

At West Trade Review, all fiction and poetry is from Submittable. Interviews are from our staff, and most of the artwork is curated. We are also free and currently accepting.

Robbin Farr, Editor, River Heron Review:

100% unsolicited. Read anonymously.

Dave Essinger, Editor, Slippery Elm:

We don’t solicit work...It’s all contest or general submissions, which will open soon btw. Sometimes I’ll flag work by writers I know, but it all gets the same read.

Elya Braden, Editor, Gyroscope Review:

At Gyroscope Review, it's only slush; we don't solicit work. Sometimes we ask writers we know to submit, but it's all part of the slush pile. The 3 of us read everything that comes in.

Marcela Sulak, Editor, Ilanot Review:

At Ilanot Review, we do solicit some, but 100% of what we publish comes from the slush pile (our solicited writers undergo the same process as the nonsolicited)

John C. Mannone, Editor, Abyss & Apex, Silver Blade, Liquid Imagination:

I edit poetry for the speculative journals Abyss & Apex, Silver Blade, as well as, Liquid Imagination, which is often speculative (but not required to be), and are all paying venues. I look for work that has literary quality and depth. 95-100% come from unsolicited submissions; I do not carry a slush pile into the following submission period--all freshly submitted (and previously unpublished) work is considered from new and seasoned poets but because of significant increases in submissions, I am becoming less forgiving for flagrant submission guideline violations. (I also edit poetry for the American Diversity Report. Though nonpaying, it probably has a larger international presence. It is not a speculative venue but might also be kind to speculative work.)

Sheila Squillante, Editor, Fourth River:

At the Fourth River it’s probably 95% from slush.

James Tate Hill, Editor, Monkeybicycle:

At Monkeybicycle it's about 95-98% per year. We usually publish 40-45 stories per year, and all but one, maybe 2, of those are from the queue.

RW Spryszak, Editor, Thrice Fiction:

The original Thrice Fiction was 100% slush. The new iteration will be about 50% once it gets rolling. We're changing our format to only a handful of contributors with 1 featured writer who provides about 40% of the issue and is invited only. The two or three other writers to supplement the rest of the issue and that will be from submissions.

Quincy R. Lehr, Editor, The Raintown Review:

About 90% at the Raintown Review. I usually ask for a couple of poems per issue, with periodic solicitation to get to relative gender parity on occasion. Unless I ask for a specific piece, acceptance is not guaranteed.

Richard Krawiec, Editor, One:

About 98% at One. Rarely do we ever solicit.

Dinty W Moore, Editor, Brevity:

Brevity is close to 99% slush pile (though I don't like that term.) We have solicited maybe three or four times over the years.

Hattie Fletcher, Editor, Creative Nonfiction:

For essays, CNF is probably ~95% unsolicited. (I can think of a handful of times when we've commissioned work for specific reasons.) The writing-about-writing stuff is different, maybe 70% writers pitching us and 30% excerpts or commissions?

Terry Kennedy, Editor, storySouth:

at storySouth, about 98% of an issue comes from the general queue.

Jack Boulton, Editor, Stimulus Respond:

At Stimulus Respond we send out a call for contributions for each issue, and we aim to use as much of the resultant contributions as we can. Authors are notified either way. This material is supplemented by 'commissioned' or solicited work. Sometimes people we know will reply to the [call for contributors] but either way there is no fixed percentage per issue (it depends how much we receive).

N.k. Wagner, Editor, Page&Spine:

Page&Spine has 3 regular contributors. All else is slush. It's our pleasure to be a promising writer's first publisher. Many writers have submitted multiple times over our 8 year history, and we love sharing their work.

Karen Rile, Editor, Cleaver:

Most issues of Cleaver are 100% from our Submittable queue. Occasionally we solicit a piece.

Stephanie Michele, Editor, Tiny Spoon Lit Mag:

At Tiny Spoon Lit Mag, we read everything! Send us some work.

What about you, dear readers? If you are an editor of a journal, are you finding your work through the slush pile, through soliciting material from writers you admire, or a mix of both? If you are a writer, how’s the submitting process going for you? Let us know!

And if you’d like more people to join the conversation, please help spread the word!