I have listened to three of the Lit Mag Reading Club interviews (Cleaver, Harvard Review, and Passengers Journal). These conversations are extremely valuable to writers for giving a sense of what the editors of journals are looking for. I know that's an obvious comment, but to hear the editors actually describe what excites them about the pieces they accept is much more telling than the brief mission statements journals include on their websites. I know we have to read the work itself published in these journals to understand their aesthetic and goals, but the conversations with editors give rich insight into why pieces are accepted or rejected. (And Becky is a great interviewer -- she really gets them talking.)
I have listened to three of the Lit Mag Reading Club interviews (Cleaver, Harvard Review, and Passengers Journal). These conversations are extremely valuable to writers for giving a sense of what the editors of journals are looking for. I know that's an obvious comment, but to hear the editors actually describe what excites them about the pieces they accept is much more telling than the brief mission statements journals include on their websites. I know we have to read the work itself published in these journals to understand their aesthetic and goals, but the conversations with editors give rich insight into why pieces are accepted or rejected. (And Becky is a great interviewer -- she really gets them talking.)