I stopped asking and paying for "editorial feedback" when the responses I received made it seem that the editor read a story different from what I had submitted. And after reading "feedback" that sounded as if it had been written by undergraduate interns trying to come off as literary and intellectual giants. I don't need to pay for that kind of abuse.
Years ago I got a two-page letter from an editor who wanted me to re-write the story "like Balzac." It made me laugh. I'd read a lot of his novels but my story was not remotely a candidate for Balzacification.
I had the same experience not too long ago after paying extra for feedback. It seemed to come from an undergrad or inexperienced early MFA student. The poem was soon published without revision in an excellent journal. I thought the feedback was amateurish and a bit boiler plate as well. —As if deep reading was beyond them. It suggested that the journal wasn’t sufficiently sophisticated in its approach.
Right now I have a poetry chapbook that first went through one beta-read (fee: $10) and which is now with an editor who critiqued a different ms of mine (fee: $35). And I always send my questions ahead and ask if these points will be specifically addressed in the critique -- before going forward.
It's my standard procedure, as a poet, to guide the person who will be giving feedback (be it for a fee or for free). I think it helps both of us.
I don't mind investing $$ in my writing career. The editor who has this poetry chapbook ms now was very helpful last year on a different poetry chapbook ms.
FYI: For 3 years I had run a poetry critique group. Yes, members were nice to each other -- but the assistance -- freely given -- was never at the most focused level. It takes time and devotion to go over an entire manuscript.
Bravo, Anne Gruner, if you know talented poets who are willing to do this time-consuming favor for FREE. Keep them close to you. Reward them as best you can. :-)
I invested probably $10,000 in the 90s to send myself on tour around the country with my first books because my publisher wouldn't. It was a solid investment because it eventually led to interviews, paid book tours here and abroad, and a lot of publicity. But spending money to get feedback from unknown readers or editors at a lit mag? That doesn't seem like a wise investment at all. Better to find a working editor you relate to who gets your work and can help you make it stronger.
AMEN-Feedback is tricky in the best of circumstances. I've sat in many writer's groups, both prose and playwriting, and few people know how to give effective feedback. Most times I hear what someone else thinks the piece "should" be. I've also sat in groups where I've heard sharply contrasting opinions of my work. What I'm left with, is trying to trust my instincts and not be defensive when someone has something actionable to say which supports my intention for the piece.(It does happen). If you can find even one person who, without an agenda, can be helpful, hang on to them for dear life.
I couldn't agree more, Ed. If the person offering the feedback/critique is unwilling (or unable) to approach the story on its own terms, the feedback in all likelihood will evoke the "then write it yourself" response from the writer.
Jun 22, 2023·edited Jun 22, 2023Liked by Doug Jacquier
No doubt about it, feedback can be weird and unwelcome. Burned on my memory is an anthology editor who promised they'd include my magical realist story that involved an elderly woman and a unicorn...if I took out the unicorn! "Our market research indicates that our readers prefer more realistic stories." Oh. By all that is holy, spare me the indignity of writing fiction tailored to your market research! Writing and submitting makes you a better writer, helps you find your voice, and develop a spine. My own Great-Lit-Ometer goes off when I read a piece that makes me FEEL something: disgust, thrill, terror, mystery, sorrow, joy. You know, human feelings. I am not interested in fiction as an intellectual exercise, but rather in the interior experiences of interesting characters and our capacity to use the power of story to survive this hard, hard thing called Life. If I were an editor, I would let submitters know this. I agree with Lev: I wouldn't solicit advice from strangers.
Jun 22, 2023·edited Jun 22, 2023Liked by Doug Jacquier
Remember the story in Monster by Joan Didion and John Gregory Dunne? They were working on a screenplay that I believe was about a celebrity gay newscaster who had killed herself. Script conference questions: "Does she have to die? Does she have to be a lesbian?"
I had a litmag editor absolutely freak out when i didn't accept all of her edits--pointing out how they negatively affected the "voice" of the character--to make him sound like he was a librarian....she'd never written fiction...threatened to pull their acceptance of my short story...a little power....wow...
I just had two pieces edited and each editor said, "Please feel to say no to anything that feels like it's interfering with your voice." I was glad to be treated well.
I've always been confused by the option to request feedback when submitting a story. Am I submitting this story with the implicit understanding that it will be rejected?
This is just another way of monetizing the slush pile. The idea isn't based on building an audience for great writing. It treats writers as the customers rather than the product.
Thanks, nathanimal. I think it's more like you are submitting a story to an outlet that is receiving a lot of them and you're trying to assess how close to the mark your work is to what they want to publish. You are right that this is sometimes simply a monetisation strategy but there are the sincere and experienced ones who are trying to help.
I would never ask for feedback from a magazine editor when submitting. As an editor, I know how overwhelmed we are and how annoying the request for feedback can be. It's not part of what we sign on to do (unless there's a fee), and more than likely that feedback would not be well received. I do occasionally give unsolicited feedback, but only rarely and only when I like the work but can't quite get over certain issues. I give it as a form of encouragement, not criticism, and feedback freely given can also be freely ignored. I haven't (and wouldn't) pay for feedback because I wouldn't trust a magazine reader to take the time to really get to know my work and respond in any useful way. If I had a good relationship with a magazine, then I might consider it, but I don't like asking random strangers to comment on my work. If I wanted feedback, I'd feel I was better off taking a class or going to a conference, where I could actually meet with a writing group or instructor for an in-person session. They would at least be more invested in me and not just in the fee I paid. I teach creative writing, have written a textbook, and direct an MFA program, so I'm not at a stage in my career where I'm looking for that kind of feedback. If I were, I would seek more sustained experiences where I would hope more valuable feedback could be given. Or I would rely on trusted writer friends to read my work and give me feedback in exchange for my reading of theirs.
...This is a case of 'Caveat Emptor'; Buyer Beware. Buying critical appraisal is pretty much a racket. All criticism is subjective and, as this person discovered, there is no inherent guarantee of quality. I don't think complaint about getting poor paid-for feedback is justifiable, it's easy money for whatever freelancers and friends of a particular editor at a literary journal or supposed professional service happen to be hanging around. Editors who are professional and care about the craft will give you feedback if you can. Otherwise, cultivate severe self-criticism and do the best you know you can. The shrewd will see and appreciate and buy or publish it.
I haven't asked any lit mags for feedback because tastes are so varied. I have no idea how experienced or simpatico or helpful the editors or readers might be, so why bother? I have beta readers I trust--and they're free. :-)
I think it helps if 1) you share some literary tastes 2) admire that person's work. Where do you find them? In writing groups, at conferences, in your neighborhood, anywhere and everywhere. Seek and ye shall find.
Jun 22, 2023·edited Jun 22, 2023Liked by Doug Jacquier
My poetry journal, Midnight Lane Boutique, remains on a long hiatus. Nonetheless, I'm going to share both when and how I offered critique.
I had a "red light," "green light," and "yellow light" approach in place. To "red light" a piece was a rejection, and a "green light" was an acceptance. If I gave the piece a "yellow light," it meant I was requesting changes prior to rendering an acceptance, and I made that clear to the person with whom I was working.
Such changes would vary between mandatory to merely suggested. More often than not, mandatory changes revolved around spelling and grammar issues, while suggested changes often involved deeper mechanical concerns, such as improving the economy of language employed, enhancing rhythmic effects, etc.
All this would be preceded by my pointing out what I found to be the strengths of the piece, wherein the poet understood what attracted me to considering it for publication. Moreover, it helped them to understand that the critique I was offering was made in good faith, that they'd received a careful reading, and that I was seeking to work *with them* to do what I perceived as an editor/publisher was *best for both of us* in terms of presentation.
There's not just an art to critique, but also a necessary understanding that as an editor/publisher we don't always know the background of those with whom we're working. One particular instance that springs to mind was some well-written narrative free-verse pieces I'd received that were full of misspellings and grammatical errors. After telling the poet how much I liked how he'd managed to construct a cohesive and compelling narrative, I then went over the spelling and grammar errors I wanted amended before rendering acceptance. All were accepted by the poet, wherein he noted he had only completed his education to the 9th grade, and that he appreciated the time I took in editing his work.
I ended up responding--truthfully, I might add--that I'd received work from folks with MFAs that were not nearly as well-handled in terms of narrative development, and also had many a misspelling and grammatical error. But, just to reiterate my point, editors/publishers need to be aware that more often than not they've no idea who they're dealing with, and to give anyone who submits a fair shake by recognizing not just obvious faults in the work, but also its strengths.
All that noted, I think unless an editor/publisher would like to publish a piece but needs it tightened up before rendering an acceptance, then it's probably best they simply refrain from offering feedback . . . most especially if they're charging fees, which I never did. For, as Doug notes, given the sheer volume of submissions many editors/publishers receive, if they're only able to provide shallow comments like "show, don't tell," then they're basically wasting their time and the writer's time, as well. And, in the case of fees, they're also wasting the writer's money!
I'm definitely no angel, Doug, lol. But, I did learn in running a smaller venue that to increase my acceptance rate I needed to carefully review what I received and be sensitive to writers' sensibilities when offering feedback. I think ultimately, if writers are amenable to criticism, then it has to be rightly couched in what's working and what's not, and to appeal to a shared interest in getting the work published. Most writers are amenable, but that doesn't mean they're going to simply trust the editor/publisher on the other end of the process unless they show 1) they understand what the writer is trying to do, and 2) that they have the skill-set to help them achieve their goal. Shallow comments like "show, don't tell" do nothing to engender such trust, most especially when not followed up with concrete examples. And, even then, phrasing of the critique matters. For instance, in the case of prose, "How about using the following [insert concrete image here]" is a far more pointed and appropriate response than a blanket "show, don't tell" comment.
This is helpful! I haven't ever asked for feedback from a lit mag, and only would consider it if I knew the editor's reputation for critique. Perhaps sadly, perhaps not, ALMOST the best critique I've received during over two decades of consistent, persistent writing is from serious critique partners.
That said, the "ALMOST" refers to a poem I recently submitted and with interest expressed, received some suggestions that kind of blew me away in the best sense. They enabled me to deepen the poem, keep the form I wanted (trimeric), and have it accepted for publication soon. It was an unexpected gift for which I am truly grateful.
I volunteer at PencilHouse. You can get detailed feedback for free. I typically make in line comments and offer feedback in a letter than can range from an 800 to 2K word discussion. Sub’s open at the start of each month - Pencilhouse.org.
Dave, if you're inclined, I'd love to hear more about your experience as a volunteer for Pencilhouse. Here or by email to me at lisakb@pobox.com. If you're not inclined, no problem. Thanks of mentioning it.
It's a crap shoot. For a few bucks it might be worth the bet that you are going to get useful feedback, but the only thing you really have to go on in deciding if the bet is worthwhile is what the magazine publishes. I have occasionally gotten some very short feedback in a rejection email. Whether the feedback resonates with me or not, I'm grateful that someone took the effort.
Learning how to evaluate and make use of feedback is crucial. In writing workshops I've taken it's clear pretty quickly who is a sensitive reader of other's work, who is someone who just doesn't consider anything not tailored to their tastes to be worth putting any effort into and perhaps most valuable, someone who doesn't really like your work, but nonetheless accepts that their role is to help what you are trying to do be better. The most useless are people who throw around literary industrial complex buzzwords like "show don't tell" or "unreliable narrator."
Every one of those experiences is why I don't pay for feedback from editors. If I want feedback, it'll be within the confines of a workshop where I've had some time to assess the perceptiveness of the editor giving the feedback. Or from an editor that I know something about and can respect their judgment.
Here’s a better strategy: find a freelance editor whose opinion you trust, and show them your work BEFORE submitting it. Together, you can polish the piece until it’s ready, and have a better chance of success. To my way of thinking, that’s money better spent.
I think i had the same reviewer "show not tell" in fact i was showing by telling...and that condescending..and nothing positive...i went on to publish most of those poems "they" shat upon....
I stopped asking and paying for "editorial feedback" when the responses I received made it seem that the editor read a story different from what I had submitted. And after reading "feedback" that sounded as if it had been written by undergraduate interns trying to come off as literary and intellectual giants. I don't need to pay for that kind of abuse.
Years ago I got a two-page letter from an editor who wanted me to re-write the story "like Balzac." It made me laugh. I'd read a lot of his novels but my story was not remotely a candidate for Balzacification.
...ya coulda tried fer Saki or Maupassant; 'tho...
LOL. I love both those writers, though, and would never aim that high.
I had the same experience not too long ago after paying extra for feedback. It seemed to come from an undergrad or inexperienced early MFA student. The poem was soon published without revision in an excellent journal. I thought the feedback was amateurish and a bit boiler plate as well. —As if deep reading was beyond them. It suggested that the journal wasn’t sufficiently sophisticated in its approach.
"How do you think that makes them feel?" Wow. Therapy-speak plus passive-aggressive is not a good look in editorial feedback.
Good call.
Right now I have a poetry chapbook that first went through one beta-read (fee: $10) and which is now with an editor who critiqued a different ms of mine (fee: $35). And I always send my questions ahead and ask if these points will be specifically addressed in the critique -- before going forward.
It's my standard procedure, as a poet, to guide the person who will be giving feedback (be it for a fee or for free). I think it helps both of us.
Cruelty, however, is unpardonable.
My two cents.
for $35 you get what you pay for....better to ask a friend who writes poetry...they'll be more honest and nicer...
I don't mind investing $$ in my writing career. The editor who has this poetry chapbook ms now was very helpful last year on a different poetry chapbook ms.
FYI: For 3 years I had run a poetry critique group. Yes, members were nice to each other -- but the assistance -- freely given -- was never at the most focused level. It takes time and devotion to go over an entire manuscript.
Bravo, Anne Gruner, if you know talented poets who are willing to do this time-consuming favor for FREE. Keep them close to you. Reward them as best you can. :-)
I invested probably $10,000 in the 90s to send myself on tour around the country with my first books because my publisher wouldn't. It was a solid investment because it eventually led to interviews, paid book tours here and abroad, and a lot of publicity. But spending money to get feedback from unknown readers or editors at a lit mag? That doesn't seem like a wise investment at all. Better to find a working editor you relate to who gets your work and can help you make it stronger.
Doug-
AMEN-Feedback is tricky in the best of circumstances. I've sat in many writer's groups, both prose and playwriting, and few people know how to give effective feedback. Most times I hear what someone else thinks the piece "should" be. I've also sat in groups where I've heard sharply contrasting opinions of my work. What I'm left with, is trying to trust my instincts and not be defensive when someone has something actionable to say which supports my intention for the piece.(It does happen). If you can find even one person who, without an agenda, can be helpful, hang on to them for dear life.
I couldn't agree more, Ed. If the person offering the feedback/critique is unwilling (or unable) to approach the story on its own terms, the feedback in all likelihood will evoke the "then write it yourself" response from the writer.
No doubt about it, feedback can be weird and unwelcome. Burned on my memory is an anthology editor who promised they'd include my magical realist story that involved an elderly woman and a unicorn...if I took out the unicorn! "Our market research indicates that our readers prefer more realistic stories." Oh. By all that is holy, spare me the indignity of writing fiction tailored to your market research! Writing and submitting makes you a better writer, helps you find your voice, and develop a spine. My own Great-Lit-Ometer goes off when I read a piece that makes me FEEL something: disgust, thrill, terror, mystery, sorrow, joy. You know, human feelings. I am not interested in fiction as an intellectual exercise, but rather in the interior experiences of interesting characters and our capacity to use the power of story to survive this hard, hard thing called Life. If I were an editor, I would let submitters know this. I agree with Lev: I wouldn't solicit advice from strangers.
Remember the story in Monster by Joan Didion and John Gregory Dunne? They were working on a screenplay that I believe was about a celebrity gay newscaster who had killed herself. Script conference questions: "Does she have to die? Does she have to be a lesbian?"
Love that anecdote. Sadly hilarious.
I had a litmag editor absolutely freak out when i didn't accept all of her edits--pointing out how they negatively affected the "voice" of the character--to make him sound like he was a librarian....she'd never written fiction...threatened to pull their acceptance of my short story...a little power....wow...
I just had two pieces edited and each editor said, "Please feel to say no to anything that feels like it's interfering with your voice." I was glad to be treated well.
"By all that is holy, spare me the indignity of writing fiction tailored to your market research!"
Haha. Oh, man. You said it.
Thank you for this thoughtful post, Doug.
I've always been confused by the option to request feedback when submitting a story. Am I submitting this story with the implicit understanding that it will be rejected?
This is just another way of monetizing the slush pile. The idea isn't based on building an audience for great writing. It treats writers as the customers rather than the product.
Thanks, nathanimal. I think it's more like you are submitting a story to an outlet that is receiving a lot of them and you're trying to assess how close to the mark your work is to what they want to publish. You are right that this is sometimes simply a monetisation strategy but there are the sincere and experienced ones who are trying to help.
Spot-on!
I would never ask for feedback from a magazine editor when submitting. As an editor, I know how overwhelmed we are and how annoying the request for feedback can be. It's not part of what we sign on to do (unless there's a fee), and more than likely that feedback would not be well received. I do occasionally give unsolicited feedback, but only rarely and only when I like the work but can't quite get over certain issues. I give it as a form of encouragement, not criticism, and feedback freely given can also be freely ignored. I haven't (and wouldn't) pay for feedback because I wouldn't trust a magazine reader to take the time to really get to know my work and respond in any useful way. If I had a good relationship with a magazine, then I might consider it, but I don't like asking random strangers to comment on my work. If I wanted feedback, I'd feel I was better off taking a class or going to a conference, where I could actually meet with a writing group or instructor for an in-person session. They would at least be more invested in me and not just in the fee I paid. I teach creative writing, have written a textbook, and direct an MFA program, so I'm not at a stage in my career where I'm looking for that kind of feedback. If I were, I would seek more sustained experiences where I would hope more valuable feedback could be given. Or I would rely on trusted writer friends to read my work and give me feedback in exchange for my reading of theirs.
...This is a case of 'Caveat Emptor'; Buyer Beware. Buying critical appraisal is pretty much a racket. All criticism is subjective and, as this person discovered, there is no inherent guarantee of quality. I don't think complaint about getting poor paid-for feedback is justifiable, it's easy money for whatever freelancers and friends of a particular editor at a literary journal or supposed professional service happen to be hanging around. Editors who are professional and care about the craft will give you feedback if you can. Otherwise, cultivate severe self-criticism and do the best you know you can. The shrewd will see and appreciate and buy or publish it.
Amen.
I haven't asked any lit mags for feedback because tastes are so varied. I have no idea how experienced or simpatico or helpful the editors or readers might be, so why bother? I have beta readers I trust--and they're free. :-)
That's great, Lev, but any hints for others as to how to find good beta readers and what qualities they should have?
I think it helps if 1) you share some literary tastes 2) admire that person's work. Where do you find them? In writing groups, at conferences, in your neighborhood, anywhere and everywhere. Seek and ye shall find.
How to find potentially good beta readers: start a critique group.
My poetry journal, Midnight Lane Boutique, remains on a long hiatus. Nonetheless, I'm going to share both when and how I offered critique.
I had a "red light," "green light," and "yellow light" approach in place. To "red light" a piece was a rejection, and a "green light" was an acceptance. If I gave the piece a "yellow light," it meant I was requesting changes prior to rendering an acceptance, and I made that clear to the person with whom I was working.
Such changes would vary between mandatory to merely suggested. More often than not, mandatory changes revolved around spelling and grammar issues, while suggested changes often involved deeper mechanical concerns, such as improving the economy of language employed, enhancing rhythmic effects, etc.
All this would be preceded by my pointing out what I found to be the strengths of the piece, wherein the poet understood what attracted me to considering it for publication. Moreover, it helped them to understand that the critique I was offering was made in good faith, that they'd received a careful reading, and that I was seeking to work *with them* to do what I perceived as an editor/publisher was *best for both of us* in terms of presentation.
There's not just an art to critique, but also a necessary understanding that as an editor/publisher we don't always know the background of those with whom we're working. One particular instance that springs to mind was some well-written narrative free-verse pieces I'd received that were full of misspellings and grammatical errors. After telling the poet how much I liked how he'd managed to construct a cohesive and compelling narrative, I then went over the spelling and grammar errors I wanted amended before rendering acceptance. All were accepted by the poet, wherein he noted he had only completed his education to the 9th grade, and that he appreciated the time I took in editing his work.
I ended up responding--truthfully, I might add--that I'd received work from folks with MFAs that were not nearly as well-handled in terms of narrative development, and also had many a misspelling and grammatical error. But, just to reiterate my point, editors/publishers need to be aware that more often than not they've no idea who they're dealing with, and to give anyone who submits a fair shake by recognizing not just obvious faults in the work, but also its strengths.
All that noted, I think unless an editor/publisher would like to publish a piece but needs it tightened up before rendering an acceptance, then it's probably best they simply refrain from offering feedback . . . most especially if they're charging fees, which I never did. For, as Doug notes, given the sheer volume of submissions many editors/publishers receive, if they're only able to provide shallow comments like "show, don't tell," then they're basically wasting their time and the writer's time, as well. And, in the case of fees, they're also wasting the writer's money!
Well said, Johnny. You're clearly one of the angels and when you re-open I suspect you are going to be deluged. :-)
I'm definitely no angel, Doug, lol. But, I did learn in running a smaller venue that to increase my acceptance rate I needed to carefully review what I received and be sensitive to writers' sensibilities when offering feedback. I think ultimately, if writers are amenable to criticism, then it has to be rightly couched in what's working and what's not, and to appeal to a shared interest in getting the work published. Most writers are amenable, but that doesn't mean they're going to simply trust the editor/publisher on the other end of the process unless they show 1) they understand what the writer is trying to do, and 2) that they have the skill-set to help them achieve their goal. Shallow comments like "show, don't tell" do nothing to engender such trust, most especially when not followed up with concrete examples. And, even then, phrasing of the critique matters. For instance, in the case of prose, "How about using the following [insert concrete image here]" is a far more pointed and appropriate response than a blanket "show, don't tell" comment.
This is helpful! I haven't ever asked for feedback from a lit mag, and only would consider it if I knew the editor's reputation for critique. Perhaps sadly, perhaps not, ALMOST the best critique I've received during over two decades of consistent, persistent writing is from serious critique partners.
That said, the "ALMOST" refers to a poem I recently submitted and with interest expressed, received some suggestions that kind of blew me away in the best sense. They enabled me to deepen the poem, keep the form I wanted (trimeric), and have it accepted for publication soon. It was an unexpected gift for which I am truly grateful.
Great to hear about this positive experience, Carol. I've had a rare few of those myself and I should have said so.
I volunteer at PencilHouse. You can get detailed feedback for free. I typically make in line comments and offer feedback in a letter than can range from an 800 to 2K word discussion. Sub’s open at the start of each month - Pencilhouse.org.
Dave, if you're inclined, I'd love to hear more about your experience as a volunteer for Pencilhouse. Here or by email to me at lisakb@pobox.com. If you're not inclined, no problem. Thanks of mentioning it.
Thanks FOR mentioning it.
It's a crap shoot. For a few bucks it might be worth the bet that you are going to get useful feedback, but the only thing you really have to go on in deciding if the bet is worthwhile is what the magazine publishes. I have occasionally gotten some very short feedback in a rejection email. Whether the feedback resonates with me or not, I'm grateful that someone took the effort.
Learning how to evaluate and make use of feedback is crucial. In writing workshops I've taken it's clear pretty quickly who is a sensitive reader of other's work, who is someone who just doesn't consider anything not tailored to their tastes to be worth putting any effort into and perhaps most valuable, someone who doesn't really like your work, but nonetheless accepts that their role is to help what you are trying to do be better. The most useless are people who throw around literary industrial complex buzzwords like "show don't tell" or "unreliable narrator."
Amen to that last sentence. :-)
Throwing those buzzwords around speaks of inexperience and/or laziness.
Every one of those experiences is why I don't pay for feedback from editors. If I want feedback, it'll be within the confines of a workshop where I've had some time to assess the perceptiveness of the editor giving the feedback. Or from an editor that I know something about and can respect their judgment.
Here’s a better strategy: find a freelance editor whose opinion you trust, and show them your work BEFORE submitting it. Together, you can polish the piece until it’s ready, and have a better chance of success. To my way of thinking, that’s money better spent.
I think i had the same reviewer "show not tell" in fact i was showing by telling...and that condescending..and nothing positive...i went on to publish most of those poems "they" shat upon....