Thanks for your thoughtful piece about what's running backstage at your lit mag - - and to commend your extraordinary gesture of offering feedback.
Though I have been given the choice to receive feedback or not, in my experience, even if you agree, and even if you send a polite reminder, most editors will not follow through, unfortunately.
The most recent example was from Meow Meow Pow Pow Lit, who offered feedback (for a piece that almost was accepted) but who never followed through. Friends, I fully take the blame for submitting to a lit mag with such a preposterous moniker and expecting normal behavior.
As a writer who encounters competent and courteous editors every week, I have few "war stories."
I just want to quote from my all-time favorite rejection letter, 5 words long.
The editors had written: "Thanks - - but not this time." :-D
I have learned a lot by being a volunteer reader for Five Minute Lit, an experience that opened my eyes to the huge range of writing out there and the tough calls that must be made on the way to publication. Also, I learned that something I loved might not be so loved by another volunteer reader and vice versa -- even though we are (of course) using the same guidelines.
See, your comment made me sad. If there is truly a "huge range of writing" out there, then why is what we see selected and published so often so much the same?
Well. I can't comment broadly speaking, but my specific volunteer reading for Five Minute Lit showed me how differently -- in both form and content -- the brief of "five minutes of your life in 100 words" can be delivered.
I love this article. I personally do appreciate when editors give you some positive feedback even when they are not publishing the story. About the story that came across as a script. I workshop all my work and have done probably over 5000 critiques over the last few years and many of what I call newbies do that a lot. They have what I call a stage direction, then dialogue, dialogue, another stage direction and more dialogue. Then there are areas where scenes are in a fog, or what they call the white room syndrome, and then more dialogue. It's as if they took the script and simply reformat it. That with POV violations are probably the most common mistakes that I have run across.
My apologies, I more than likely unintentionally exaggerated. I belong to three workshops, two online and one live. I just checked my numbers. The online workshops I have done in the past three years about 650 and 780 critiques. The live one, every other week we critique about 5 to 7 stories. I usually do an immersive crit to about 3 of them. So I guess you can revoke my sainthood status. LOL.
I agree with a lot of this.... I also do my best to keep guidelines simple - basically if it's romance and well-written it's modt likely accepted... I don't accept previously published or simultaneous submissions, though... I never submit(ted) to more than one place at a time, and read a lot of comments on social media from people who do, then hate having to withdraw pieces - so to me its simple, just don't do it. Honestly it's kind of disrespectful to lit mags and if you can't wait at least a month for replies, don't submit to lit mags that state long response times. I'm open year round on a rolling basis, but if I dona special call, I don't mind if people submit sooner than the open date or if they're a day or two late.... Some mags flip out and automatically reject those works. What's the big deal?! As far as feedback - I give pleasant, personal rejections and acceptances. I'm honest about why I don't accept something... As a writer, I loathe receiving unsolicited feedback, and will never give any detailed feedback, unless a writer asks... And absolutely -- get that behind the scenes experience. It's that experience that pushed me to start my own lit mag....
As a poet who is still waiting for replies to lit mags who received my submission in FEBRUARY 2024, honestly, I do think it's kind of disrespectful to keep writers dangling for more than 6 months and longer.
My work sets sail at dawn on the good ship S.S. Simultaneous! Boarding now . . .
I'm with you on the unsolicited feedback. At this point I prefer to run my work through trusted betas--so much of the unsolicited feedback I receive has that great giant "whoosh" that indicates they missed the point of the story. The other thing is that while some editors seek positives, there *are* editors out there who will grasp at any inclination to punch down on the writer, even if their only objection is to a minuscule aspect of formatting.
What writer worth their salt demands that their work be published unedited? Even big names benefit from the editor's pen, and then there's always the requirements of fitting the house style. We have plenty of evidence out there that publishing big name writer's work unedited simply shows...the editor was right (cough-cough Stephen King and Robert Heinlein come to mind to begin with).
For someone submitting to a small litmag to make the same sort of demand just boggles me. If they're publishing in a small market (unless they've been solicited, and even then...) they simply aren't of the commercial and literary strength to justify such a demand. Except in their own minds.
So true that editing/reviewing other people's work improves your own writing. It's a lot easier to see what doesn't work in somebody else's piece. I guest edit twice a year for an online mag and it's a highly rewarding experience. I rarely offer feedback, it's a personal attitude toward submissions. I like the simple yes/no and move on, with a thank you for sending the work and keep an eye out for our next theme and sub window.
I am now co-editor of a community-based regional lit mag produced by a community college. We don't offer feedback unless we request some changes. We try to keep our guidelines simple, and as a regional, we find we get submissions from all over the country that we have to immediately reject. We plan to offer some free webinars on submitting to our lit mag to help nurture the literary community in our county and state. We'd like to receive more and higher-quality prose. Most of our submissions from long-time contributors are poetry. We are now planning our 2024 issue launch with an online reading. We changed the trim size to be more aligned with other lit mags produced by colleges and changed to a perfect binding. We are funded by a county grant and hope that we can keep within our budget for this. I am loving the experience!
I accidentally started a lit mag a bajillion years ago. It lasted no more than a year once I realized what I had done. I didn't have the heart to reject people. Though I never got overwhelmed with submissions because it was the egg in an ovum nascent days of the internet, its definitely given me a lot of empathy with what you're describing. Very very brave of anyone I feel to start a lit mag. What ended up happening to the mag and the work? Did you pass it on to someone, or did you archive the work somewhere?
I think digital and print copies for most (if not all) of the six issues are still on Amazon. I used the lit mag's name (Printed Words) to curate and publish three anthologies - 2 of which were for charity.
Thank you for writing this, Amanda! I founded a litmag almost 12 years ago thinking of it as a lark... and it's colonized my life. It's also taught me a lot about publishing, human nature, team-building, and helped me develop all kinds of new skills.
I was struck by what you said about writers not always wanting feedback. Until recently, if a piece received constructive, positive feedback from the editors, I would anonymize what they wrote and pass it on instead of sending a form rejection. Most writers seemed to appreciate that, and many wrote back with thanks. Quite a few even emailed to say they'd taken our advice and sold the revision to another magazine, which I think is great. (Magazines are not compeition with each other--together, we thrive!)
But a while ago I saw a comment on this very blog from one of our submitters who had been hurt and discouraged by feedback I'd passed on, not realizing that what I saw as encouraging could make that writer feel tender and upset. That was a revelation. My team and decided to add a checkbox in Submittable "Do you want feedback?" Now if they box is unchecked I don't pass on the editors' remarks, even if it's glowing and positive. I appreciate knowing that not everyone wants feedback and want to respect those boundaries.
Nice piece, especially your take on the nuances of providing feedback to submitters, and pointing out when editors set a theme for an issue… they mean it!
Interesting to see this perspective. I don't think I agree with the "closing early" part, though. If your goal is to publish the best material that you receive during your announced submission window, why would you end it prematurely, potentially missing out on the very best stuff submitted at the end? If you want the freedom to close when you are satisfied with what you've received, it seems to me a rolling submission window is fairer.
I also continue to maintain that if your guidelines are overly complicated, you may need to look at what you are requiring and why it is so specific. Most complicated guidelines seem to be just a way to reduce submissions by seeing who isn't willing to jump through seemingly arbitrary hoops.
Okay, but if your format is so non-standard and demanding that it requires an excessive amount of special formatting, I'd say the burden for formatting *should* fall on the publisher.
Agreed. I steer clear of mags with complicated guidelines that require non-standard format changes. The ones that ask for my contact info on the document itself are a red flag. If they’re not reading blind, then I’m not submitting. And I do not submit to mags who won’t take simultaneous subs unless they promise an expedited response of three days. I’m not waiting a month or two to get a form rejection. I don’t need positive feedback in my rejections, but those short, snippy ones really do get under my skin.
Thanks for your thoughtful piece about what's running backstage at your lit mag - - and to commend your extraordinary gesture of offering feedback.
Though I have been given the choice to receive feedback or not, in my experience, even if you agree, and even if you send a polite reminder, most editors will not follow through, unfortunately.
The most recent example was from Meow Meow Pow Pow Lit, who offered feedback (for a piece that almost was accepted) but who never followed through. Friends, I fully take the blame for submitting to a lit mag with such a preposterous moniker and expecting normal behavior.
As a writer who encounters competent and courteous editors every week, I have few "war stories."
I just want to quote from my all-time favorite rejection letter, 5 words long.
The editors had written: "Thanks - - but not this time." :-D
I have learned a lot by being a volunteer reader for Five Minute Lit, an experience that opened my eyes to the huge range of writing out there and the tough calls that must be made on the way to publication. Also, I learned that something I loved might not be so loved by another volunteer reader and vice versa -- even though we are (of course) using the same guidelines.
See, your comment made me sad. If there is truly a "huge range of writing" out there, then why is what we see selected and published so often so much the same?
Well. I can't comment broadly speaking, but my specific volunteer reading for Five Minute Lit showed me how differently -- in both form and content -- the brief of "five minutes of your life in 100 words" can be delivered.
I love this article. I personally do appreciate when editors give you some positive feedback even when they are not publishing the story. About the story that came across as a script. I workshop all my work and have done probably over 5000 critiques over the last few years and many of what I call newbies do that a lot. They have what I call a stage direction, then dialogue, dialogue, another stage direction and more dialogue. Then there are areas where scenes are in a fog, or what they call the white room syndrome, and then more dialogue. It's as if they took the script and simply reformat it. That with POV violations are probably the most common mistakes that I have run across.
Luis, for doing 5,000 critiques, I will nominate you for SAINTHOOD!
My apologies, I more than likely unintentionally exaggerated. I belong to three workshops, two online and one live. I just checked my numbers. The online workshops I have done in the past three years about 650 and 780 critiques. The live one, every other week we critique about 5 to 7 stories. I usually do an immersive crit to about 3 of them. So I guess you can revoke my sainthood status. LOL.
Well, then I guess I'll have to call the Vatican with an explanation, Luis, but it's all right. :-D
I agree with a lot of this.... I also do my best to keep guidelines simple - basically if it's romance and well-written it's modt likely accepted... I don't accept previously published or simultaneous submissions, though... I never submit(ted) to more than one place at a time, and read a lot of comments on social media from people who do, then hate having to withdraw pieces - so to me its simple, just don't do it. Honestly it's kind of disrespectful to lit mags and if you can't wait at least a month for replies, don't submit to lit mags that state long response times. I'm open year round on a rolling basis, but if I dona special call, I don't mind if people submit sooner than the open date or if they're a day or two late.... Some mags flip out and automatically reject those works. What's the big deal?! As far as feedback - I give pleasant, personal rejections and acceptances. I'm honest about why I don't accept something... As a writer, I loathe receiving unsolicited feedback, and will never give any detailed feedback, unless a writer asks... And absolutely -- get that behind the scenes experience. It's that experience that pushed me to start my own lit mag....
I think if a mag doesn’t take sim-subs, offering personal comments to submitters is an appropriate exchange.
As a poet who is still waiting for replies to lit mags who received my submission in FEBRUARY 2024, honestly, I do think it's kind of disrespectful to keep writers dangling for more than 6 months and longer.
My work sets sail at dawn on the good ship S.S. Simultaneous! Boarding now . . .
I'm with you on the unsolicited feedback. At this point I prefer to run my work through trusted betas--so much of the unsolicited feedback I receive has that great giant "whoosh" that indicates they missed the point of the story. The other thing is that while some editors seek positives, there *are* editors out there who will grasp at any inclination to punch down on the writer, even if their only objection is to a minuscule aspect of formatting.
What writer worth their salt demands that their work be published unedited? Even big names benefit from the editor's pen, and then there's always the requirements of fitting the house style. We have plenty of evidence out there that publishing big name writer's work unedited simply shows...the editor was right (cough-cough Stephen King and Robert Heinlein come to mind to begin with).
For someone submitting to a small litmag to make the same sort of demand just boggles me. If they're publishing in a small market (unless they've been solicited, and even then...) they simply aren't of the commercial and literary strength to justify such a demand. Except in their own minds.
So true that editing/reviewing other people's work improves your own writing. It's a lot easier to see what doesn't work in somebody else's piece. I guest edit twice a year for an online mag and it's a highly rewarding experience. I rarely offer feedback, it's a personal attitude toward submissions. I like the simple yes/no and move on, with a thank you for sending the work and keep an eye out for our next theme and sub window.
I am now co-editor of a community-based regional lit mag produced by a community college. We don't offer feedback unless we request some changes. We try to keep our guidelines simple, and as a regional, we find we get submissions from all over the country that we have to immediately reject. We plan to offer some free webinars on submitting to our lit mag to help nurture the literary community in our county and state. We'd like to receive more and higher-quality prose. Most of our submissions from long-time contributors are poetry. We are now planning our 2024 issue launch with an online reading. We changed the trim size to be more aligned with other lit mags produced by colleges and changed to a perfect binding. We are funded by a county grant and hope that we can keep within our budget for this. I am loving the experience!
Barbara, "simple guidelines"! "Nurturing the community"! You are the last of a dying breed.
I kneel to kiss your hem, my friend.
I accidentally started a lit mag a bajillion years ago. It lasted no more than a year once I realized what I had done. I didn't have the heart to reject people. Though I never got overwhelmed with submissions because it was the egg in an ovum nascent days of the internet, its definitely given me a lot of empathy with what you're describing. Very very brave of anyone I feel to start a lit mag. What ended up happening to the mag and the work? Did you pass it on to someone, or did you archive the work somewhere?
Hi River
I think digital and print copies for most (if not all) of the six issues are still on Amazon. I used the lit mag's name (Printed Words) to curate and publish three anthologies - 2 of which were for charity.
Glad to hear the lit mag's name was not Meow Meow Bow Wow Pow Pow Lit!! LOL
Thank you for writing this, Amanda! I founded a litmag almost 12 years ago thinking of it as a lark... and it's colonized my life. It's also taught me a lot about publishing, human nature, team-building, and helped me develop all kinds of new skills.
I was struck by what you said about writers not always wanting feedback. Until recently, if a piece received constructive, positive feedback from the editors, I would anonymize what they wrote and pass it on instead of sending a form rejection. Most writers seemed to appreciate that, and many wrote back with thanks. Quite a few even emailed to say they'd taken our advice and sold the revision to another magazine, which I think is great. (Magazines are not compeition with each other--together, we thrive!)
But a while ago I saw a comment on this very blog from one of our submitters who had been hurt and discouraged by feedback I'd passed on, not realizing that what I saw as encouraging could make that writer feel tender and upset. That was a revelation. My team and decided to add a checkbox in Submittable "Do you want feedback?" Now if they box is unchecked I don't pass on the editors' remarks, even if it's glowing and positive. I appreciate knowing that not everyone wants feedback and want to respect those boundaries.
"I founded a lit mag -- and it's colonized my life."
#QuoteOfTheDay OMG! Karen, I hope you will put this on a T-shirt! It's fabulous!!
Thank you for my first good chuckle of the week-- and it's Friday! Maybe I will make that t-shirt.
If someone turns your sentence into a fridge magnet for sale on ETSY -- without crediting you, Karen -- I will let you know.
* * Lit Mag Patrol: on guard! * *
Every writer should read this post. Thank you for sharing.
Thanks, Amanda. This is thoughtful and helpful. Best, J
Nice piece, especially your take on the nuances of providing feedback to submitters, and pointing out when editors set a theme for an issue… they mean it!
Interesting to see this perspective. I don't think I agree with the "closing early" part, though. If your goal is to publish the best material that you receive during your announced submission window, why would you end it prematurely, potentially missing out on the very best stuff submitted at the end? If you want the freedom to close when you are satisfied with what you've received, it seems to me a rolling submission window is fairer.
I also continue to maintain that if your guidelines are overly complicated, you may need to look at what you are requiring and why it is so specific. Most complicated guidelines seem to be just a way to reduce submissions by seeing who isn't willing to jump through seemingly arbitrary hoops.
A lot of the complicated guidelines are also looking for pre-formatted work that they don't have to manipulate in order to publish.
Okay, but if your format is so non-standard and demanding that it requires an excessive amount of special formatting, I'd say the burden for formatting *should* fall on the publisher.
Agreed. I steer clear of mags with complicated guidelines that require non-standard format changes. The ones that ask for my contact info on the document itself are a red flag. If they’re not reading blind, then I’m not submitting. And I do not submit to mags who won’t take simultaneous subs unless they promise an expedited response of three days. I’m not waiting a month or two to get a form rejection. I don’t need positive feedback in my rejections, but those short, snippy ones really do get under my skin.
As someone who’s imagined starting a litmag for a year or so now, this was very helpful. Thank you.
Thanks so much. I have a better understanding of what goes on behind the scenes.
Thank you for sharing your experiences and it’s important for submitters to understand the editors’ side.