Scam alert!; submission fee & response time stats; invisibilisation of class in the lit world; breaking submission rules; leaving MFA programs; AI-related sub guidelines; reading lit mags; and more
“The MFA machine keeps pumping out identical voices. Workshop darlings who write beautiful sentences about nothing. Students worry more about pleasing professors than creating something that matters. They've turned fiction into a product you can manufacture if you follow the right steps.”
Speaking as an iconoclastic old autodidact in this writing business, whenever I see the letters MFA, I think the first letter must stand for Mother with the following two letters standing for words that complete a common American insult. More seriously, the existence of such courses seems to me to be the equivalent of setting up courses to teach art via painting by numbers.
Just to be contrary, let me say that these complaints about MFA programs have been going on for decades and are no less tired than they were 30 years ago. The MFA of course isn't the only way a writer can get professional practice. But it can often be a good way. The best ones give students teaching fellowships and teach them how to teach. I think it's cynical and, again, lazy to complain about how they're just "factories." Writing can be taught just like any other art form can be taught, and teaching writing is an honorable profession and one I've been proud to do for 30 years even though I haven't published extensively. I'm grateful to my MFA program for inducting me into the professions of teaching and editing. May I just finally add that in most of these cookie-cutter complaints about the MFA, I detect a strong whiff of sour grapes. It's hard to get into a good one, it's true.
I’m not sure why you are attacking me. I was merely addressing the quotation referenced by BT. Address your complaints to the source not the minor tributary. I am not American, and I don’t live in an English-speaking country and I’m well on my way to being 90. I mention these facts because MFAs strike me as being an American phenomenon and it's a bit late in the day for me, anyway. Americans have always known how to monetize every form of education. So much for sour grapes. You admit to not publishing extensively but there you are teaching writing, exemplifying the age-old adage that those who can, do, and those who can’t, teach. Unlike you, I have published extensively, which doesn’t necessarily mean I’m any good at writing, but I find it enjoyable. You, no doubt, would tell me that an MFA would improve my writing. Maybe, maybe not. As far as I know, poets like Heaney and Simon Armitage are not products of MFA courses (and no, I’m not comparing myself to those two greats before you make any wisecracks.)
My goodness. If you'll read my note, you'll see I never attacked you but the anti-MFA position. Meanwhile, you attack me by saying I can't write. For what it's worth, I have two books published with small presses and stories published in journals; I've been dedicated to my craft my whole life and have helped countless students. I have no idea if an MFA would improve your writing. Not do I know why you're compelled to insult strangers on the Internet. I guess I wrote well enough to get under your skin.
P.S. Tony, out of curiosity, I looked you up and see that you've been writing since the pandemic and have self -published (? correct me if I'm wrong) some collections of poetry and flash fiction. I'm not sure why that should make you so defensive, and I'm not here to throw around wisecracks. Writing is a serious hobby we all can enjoy.
Okay. I can see you're very proud of all your activity, and this thread has been a good way for you to publicize your work. Quantity doesn't necessarily equal quality, of course, but you've been energetic. Feel free to look up mine as well.
Cara, I agree with you; just for the fun of it, I looked at graduates of Syracuse's MFA program: George Saunders, Nana Kwame Adjei-Brenyah, Claire Messud, Anthony Veasna So, Lily King, Tom Perrotta, etc. That's quite an eclectic bunch. People make similar complaints about The New Yorker....
Been saying the same for years. I call it the MFA factory, each location with their nearly identical blueprints. I find quite a lot of stories from the factory very nicely done, but one voice is indistinguishable from the other.
Re Simian Smith and AI. Like the lit mag mentioned, at New Pop Lit we're firmly against AI, but we try to spell it out: "No AI!! Generated, structured, edited or designed."
There are reasons not to use the technology in any way (including the huge amounts of water and electricity consumed in the training of LLM's, and from their use). Another reason: the push for AI by the largest companies on the planet, run by the world's richest individuals-- obscenely wealthy individuals (see the Jeff Bezos wedding)-- is an enormous gamble/money grab. Hundreds of billions of dollars have been invested in the technology, on the prospect that it will be used by everybody. Once everyone's using it, they'll proceed to monetize it. RIGHT NOW they're not making profits off it. Continuing investment in AI (and AI stocks) by venture capitalists is fueled by one thing: use by individuals, including writers. Chatbot use is strictly monitored, including by investment analysts.
Since the damage done to humanity, including to writers and artists, will be substantial, there can be only one stance toward the technology. One mantra: DON'T USE AI!! When you do, in any way, you're enabling the entire enterprise and the forthcoming consequences. Just saying.
I'll probably never pay for feedback again once I've witnessed what AI can provide; not that I value AI highly, but it will be so easy for an editor to submit the piece to AI and return the feedback as their own that that I'll always be skeptical.
Tom, though I, too, am suspicious about paid feedback - - and I know where to get free feedback - - I sent my poetry WIP to Fahmidan Journal for a beta-read at a fair price and really got my money's worth. Outstanding critique. Via Black Lawrence Press I paid for a reasonable Fiction Consultation with Adam Prince - - very much worth it. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . * * * * * CAVEAT: Quillkeepers Press offers paid feedback & it's amateurish, lazy, and useless. Stephanie Lamb's "critiques" are not worth $35 - - or whatever she's charging now. Contact me off list if you'd like more details about my Quillkeepers Press experience.
Thank you Becky, for your indefatigable energy. I had a couple of hits this month for this first time in a long while and I am motivated (once they are live) to share them on this site as part of the monthly brag feature.
Absolutely adored this post, Becky! I feel this way, as a writer And as a reader, especially of novels. I’m 68 years old and have been an avid reader since I was 7. I can’t tell you the number of “award-winning” books I’ve ditched in recent years. I used to be of the old school: read to the end: it will redeem itself. No more! I know immediately if it’s “stock” and “schlock.” I had immense difficulty getting my novel Time Enough published. Not a single Canadian publisher accepting non-agent submissions would take it, and of course, no feedback. I finally found a small US publisher who loved it. Since publishing in January, the response has been so positive, overwhelmingly so. People are hungry for real, authentic work. I was scared. I thought maybe they were all right and it would flop. They weren’t. The letters and accolades I’m receiving prove it. So as writers, we must follow the advice given here, and stick to our instincts and beliefs, no matter what “they” say will fit “the market.”
Thanks so much for fighting the good fight, Becky. I love that you genuinely want writers to succeed and that you help weed out bad actors. All the best!
1. I occasionally hear about a new litmag on social media, and the first thing I do is check their masthead. A good sign of a scammy litmag is it has no masthead. Writers should know who they are sending their work to. Look them up, see what their qualifications are.
2. An acquaintance of my partner recently had an essay published in a famous glossy literary magazine, and they said that during the editorial process, every word was analyzed and every sentence revised until it fit the house style.
"Is not allowing submissions that are “aided in any manner by AI” discriminatory?" - Admittedly they should have quantified this as *generative* AI; technically spell- and grammar checks are AI tools. If this magazine and others are that rigid, I guess my career is over.
But disabled people have been writing for decades without genAI and centuries before computers. The letter-writer here implies that disabled people are *un*able without genAI.
If we're going to allow AI in creative pursuits, I at least wish those stories were marked, so people who think computer generated stories can piss off into the sun (hi!!) are able to simply scroll/flip past.
Congratulations, Becky, on being featured in Writer’s Digest.
Regardless of the editorial teams people form, legitimate literary magazines—even if they are “little,” unknown, and not prestigious—typically provide valid and verifiable contact information. Some provide mailing addresses and even phone numbers for editors or their general staff, but this is becoming less the norm due to privacy, spam, and workload concerns. However, many still list editorial contact emails (usually for submissions, questions, readership dues, queries, or rights inquiries) on their websites or in submission guidelines.
It is fishy when people hide who their editors are. It’s understandable why writers have many pen names, but it is weird when editors set up literary magazines to collect dues and run away. Another thing to look out for is plagiarism, because I have friends—who Becky has covered in previous posts—that have submitted to these types of lit mags, then their work gets plagiarized without consent or credit.
For instance, when reviewing submissions, please refer to the contact information section on the magazines’ websites; it should look something like the following, though the information varies:
Submission Contact: Usually via Submittable, but editorial contacts may be listed in the masthead or specific announcements.
Phone: Not typically listed.
Hope this helps in what to look for when submitting online. Unfortunately, there are too many scams and posers out there. We must guard against exploitation in the literary world, as it can deplete our finances with these shameful fees.
Since I love ’80s music—great song reference! From now on, whenever I listen to that ’80s song “Everybody Wants to Rule the World” by Tears for Fears, I will think of you, Becky, and literary magazines. LOL. You just gave it a fun, new meaning.
Thanks for the heads up re: Street Lit. I hadn't heard of them before, but if I had come across their site, I would have passed based on their design aesthetic. If my work is going to appear on a web site (yes, I know... if), I want the design to be something I'd be happy to be a part of.
Wow. Who knew that limags are just like other online businesses in having their share of scammers? ;-) Yes, most litmags are run by good honest folk whose focus is encouraging writers and not stoking their own egos through their gatekeeping but the whole industry is based on the same laws of the jungle that apply to life in general and rose-coloured reading glasses don't help. Re AI and MFAs, AI is the cheaper way to go if all you want to achieve is publication. ;-)
Hi. When it comes to resubmitting, I ask, first. Often, since I only do this with litmags who sent encouraging rejections, they say yes. Even when and editor says no, they thank me for checking.
I wanted to recommend Pencil House, an organization that provides cheap or free feedback.
They open for _free_ feedback the first two days of every month, or until they reach their cap.
I submitted a story to them a couple of years ago, and got three single-spaced pages of kind, constructive feedback.
Here are links for more information:
https://pencilhouse.org/programs/feedback/
https://www.instagram.com/ThePencilhouse
As a reader for Pencil House, I'm glad you've given them a shout out.
Oh this looks NEAT. Thanks for sharing!
“The MFA machine keeps pumping out identical voices. Workshop darlings who write beautiful sentences about nothing. Students worry more about pleasing professors than creating something that matters. They've turned fiction into a product you can manufacture if you follow the right steps.”
Speaking as an iconoclastic old autodidact in this writing business, whenever I see the letters MFA, I think the first letter must stand for Mother with the following two letters standing for words that complete a common American insult. More seriously, the existence of such courses seems to me to be the equivalent of setting up courses to teach art via painting by numbers.
Just to be contrary, let me say that these complaints about MFA programs have been going on for decades and are no less tired than they were 30 years ago. The MFA of course isn't the only way a writer can get professional practice. But it can often be a good way. The best ones give students teaching fellowships and teach them how to teach. I think it's cynical and, again, lazy to complain about how they're just "factories." Writing can be taught just like any other art form can be taught, and teaching writing is an honorable profession and one I've been proud to do for 30 years even though I haven't published extensively. I'm grateful to my MFA program for inducting me into the professions of teaching and editing. May I just finally add that in most of these cookie-cutter complaints about the MFA, I detect a strong whiff of sour grapes. It's hard to get into a good one, it's true.
Dear Cara,
I’m not sure why you are attacking me. I was merely addressing the quotation referenced by BT. Address your complaints to the source not the minor tributary. I am not American, and I don’t live in an English-speaking country and I’m well on my way to being 90. I mention these facts because MFAs strike me as being an American phenomenon and it's a bit late in the day for me, anyway. Americans have always known how to monetize every form of education. So much for sour grapes. You admit to not publishing extensively but there you are teaching writing, exemplifying the age-old adage that those who can, do, and those who can’t, teach. Unlike you, I have published extensively, which doesn’t necessarily mean I’m any good at writing, but I find it enjoyable. You, no doubt, would tell me that an MFA would improve my writing. Maybe, maybe not. As far as I know, poets like Heaney and Simon Armitage are not products of MFA courses (and no, I’m not comparing myself to those two greats before you make any wisecracks.)
My goodness. If you'll read my note, you'll see I never attacked you but the anti-MFA position. Meanwhile, you attack me by saying I can't write. For what it's worth, I have two books published with small presses and stories published in journals; I've been dedicated to my craft my whole life and have helped countless students. I have no idea if an MFA would improve your writing. Not do I know why you're compelled to insult strangers on the Internet. I guess I wrote well enough to get under your skin.
P.S. Tony, out of curiosity, I looked you up and see that you've been writing since the pandemic and have self -published (? correct me if I'm wrong) some collections of poetry and flash fiction. I'm not sure why that should make you so defensive, and I'm not here to throw around wisecracks. Writing is a serious hobby we all can enjoy.
Oops --your books are published with small presses, as are mine. 😀
I’ve only published some 142 poems in a variety of journals and if you want to read reviews of my published collections you can find them here:
"Afterthoughts A Collection" by Tony Dawson Published by Cyberwit.net ISBN: 978-81-19228-34-8 First edition: 2023
Review by Charles Rammelkamp for the London Grip New Poetry
https://londongrip.co.uk/2023/06/london-grip-poetry-review-tony-dawson/
"Musings: Poems" by Tony Dawson Published by Impspired ISBN 9781915819666 First Edition December 2023
Review by Charles Rammelkamp for the London Grip New Poetry
https://londongrip.co.uk/2023/12/london-grip-poetry-review-tony-dawson-2/
"Reflections in a Dirty Mirror. Poems and Short Fiction" by Tony Dawson Published by Impspired ISBN 978-1915819949 First Edition: April 2024
Review by Charles Rammelkamp for the London Grip New Poetry
https://londongrip.co.uk/2024/04/london-grip-poetry-review-tony-dawson-3/
I have also published 21 pieces of flash fiction. The latest can be found here:
https://literallystories2014.com/2025/06/09/snow-white-meets-little-red-riding-hood-by-tony-dawson/#more-41824
Okay. I can see you're very proud of all your activity, and this thread has been a good way for you to publicize your work. Quantity doesn't necessarily equal quality, of course, but you've been energetic. Feel free to look up mine as well.
Cara, I agree with you; just for the fun of it, I looked at graduates of Syracuse's MFA program: George Saunders, Nana Kwame Adjei-Brenyah, Claire Messud, Anthony Veasna So, Lily King, Tom Perrotta, etc. That's quite an eclectic bunch. People make similar complaints about The New Yorker....
That they do!
Been saying the same for years. I call it the MFA factory, each location with their nearly identical blueprints. I find quite a lot of stories from the factory very nicely done, but one voice is indistinguishable from the other.
This is exactly how I feel. I call it navel gazing prose.
Re Simian Smith and AI. Like the lit mag mentioned, at New Pop Lit we're firmly against AI, but we try to spell it out: "No AI!! Generated, structured, edited or designed."
There are reasons not to use the technology in any way (including the huge amounts of water and electricity consumed in the training of LLM's, and from their use). Another reason: the push for AI by the largest companies on the planet, run by the world's richest individuals-- obscenely wealthy individuals (see the Jeff Bezos wedding)-- is an enormous gamble/money grab. Hundreds of billions of dollars have been invested in the technology, on the prospect that it will be used by everybody. Once everyone's using it, they'll proceed to monetize it. RIGHT NOW they're not making profits off it. Continuing investment in AI (and AI stocks) by venture capitalists is fueled by one thing: use by individuals, including writers. Chatbot use is strictly monitored, including by investment analysts.
Since the damage done to humanity, including to writers and artists, will be substantial, there can be only one stance toward the technology. One mantra: DON'T USE AI!! When you do, in any way, you're enabling the entire enterprise and the forthcoming consequences. Just saying.
I'll probably never pay for feedback again once I've witnessed what AI can provide; not that I value AI highly, but it will be so easy for an editor to submit the piece to AI and return the feedback as their own that that I'll always be skeptical.
Tom, though I, too, am suspicious about paid feedback - - and I know where to get free feedback - - I sent my poetry WIP to Fahmidan Journal for a beta-read at a fair price and really got my money's worth. Outstanding critique. Via Black Lawrence Press I paid for a reasonable Fiction Consultation with Adam Prince - - very much worth it. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . * * * * * CAVEAT: Quillkeepers Press offers paid feedback & it's amateurish, lazy, and useless. Stephanie Lamb's "critiques" are not worth $35 - - or whatever she's charging now. Contact me off list if you'd like more details about my Quillkeepers Press experience.
Thank you Becky, for your indefatigable energy. I had a couple of hits this month for this first time in a long while and I am motivated (once they are live) to share them on this site as part of the monthly brag feature.
Absolutely adored this post, Becky! I feel this way, as a writer And as a reader, especially of novels. I’m 68 years old and have been an avid reader since I was 7. I can’t tell you the number of “award-winning” books I’ve ditched in recent years. I used to be of the old school: read to the end: it will redeem itself. No more! I know immediately if it’s “stock” and “schlock.” I had immense difficulty getting my novel Time Enough published. Not a single Canadian publisher accepting non-agent submissions would take it, and of course, no feedback. I finally found a small US publisher who loved it. Since publishing in January, the response has been so positive, overwhelmingly so. People are hungry for real, authentic work. I was scared. I thought maybe they were all right and it would flop. They weren’t. The letters and accolades I’m receiving prove it. So as writers, we must follow the advice given here, and stick to our instincts and beliefs, no matter what “they” say will fit “the market.”
Lise, congratulations.
Thanks so much for fighting the good fight, Becky. I love that you genuinely want writers to succeed and that you help weed out bad actors. All the best!
1. I occasionally hear about a new litmag on social media, and the first thing I do is check their masthead. A good sign of a scammy litmag is it has no masthead. Writers should know who they are sending their work to. Look them up, see what their qualifications are.
2. An acquaintance of my partner recently had an essay published in a famous glossy literary magazine, and they said that during the editorial process, every word was analyzed and every sentence revised until it fit the house style.
"Is not allowing submissions that are “aided in any manner by AI” discriminatory?" - Admittedly they should have quantified this as *generative* AI; technically spell- and grammar checks are AI tools. If this magazine and others are that rigid, I guess my career is over.
But disabled people have been writing for decades without genAI and centuries before computers. The letter-writer here implies that disabled people are *un*able without genAI.
If we're going to allow AI in creative pursuits, I at least wish those stories were marked, so people who think computer generated stories can piss off into the sun (hi!!) are able to simply scroll/flip past.
Thanks for linking to my newsletter. I’m glad you enjoyed it.
Congratulations, Becky, on being featured in Writer’s Digest.
Regardless of the editorial teams people form, legitimate literary magazines—even if they are “little,” unknown, and not prestigious—typically provide valid and verifiable contact information. Some provide mailing addresses and even phone numbers for editors or their general staff, but this is becoming less the norm due to privacy, spam, and workload concerns. However, many still list editorial contact emails (usually for submissions, questions, readership dues, queries, or rights inquiries) on their websites or in submission guidelines.
It is fishy when people hide who their editors are. It’s understandable why writers have many pen names, but it is weird when editors set up literary magazines to collect dues and run away. Another thing to look out for is plagiarism, because I have friends—who Becky has covered in previous posts—that have submitted to these types of lit mags, then their work gets plagiarized without consent or credit.
For instance, when reviewing submissions, please refer to the contact information section on the magazines’ websites; it should look something like the following, though the information varies:
The Georgia Review
Email: garev@uga.edu
Phone: (706) 542-3481
ZYZZYVA
Address: 57 Post Street, Suite 902, San Francisco, CA 94104
Email: editor@zyzzyva.org
Phone: Not often listed publicly.
The Paris Review
Email Contact: contact@theparisreview.org
Submission Contact: Usually via Submittable, but editorial contacts may be listed in the masthead or specific announcements.
Phone: Not typically listed.
Hope this helps in what to look for when submitting online. Unfortunately, there are too many scams and posers out there. We must guard against exploitation in the literary world, as it can deplete our finances with these shameful fees.
Since I love ’80s music—great song reference! From now on, whenever I listen to that ’80s song “Everybody Wants to Rule the World” by Tears for Fears, I will think of you, Becky, and literary magazines. LOL. You just gave it a fun, new meaning.
Thanks for the heads up re: Street Lit. I hadn't heard of them before, but if I had come across their site, I would have passed based on their design aesthetic. If my work is going to appear on a web site (yes, I know... if), I want the design to be something I'd be happy to be a part of.
Simian Smith needs to learn more about AI.
There needs to be more of an effort to address submission fees on the issue of class. Paying to have my work read just isolating and draining.
Wow. Who knew that limags are just like other online businesses in having their share of scammers? ;-) Yes, most litmags are run by good honest folk whose focus is encouraging writers and not stoking their own egos through their gatekeeping but the whole industry is based on the same laws of the jungle that apply to life in general and rose-coloured reading glasses don't help. Re AI and MFAs, AI is the cheaper way to go if all you want to achieve is publication. ;-)
Hi. When it comes to resubmitting, I ask, first. Often, since I only do this with litmags who sent encouraging rejections, they say yes. Even when and editor says no, they thank me for checking.