Thank you for clarifying your challenges and the complexities of this issue. One barrier is that the US is not a country of readers, and this is reflected in the paucity of commercially successful literary magazines (The New Yorker, and....?) Your thoughts about this?
Sorry, but charging fees is an inherently exploitative and illegitimate practice. When you do that, the author is your customer, not your producer or collaborator, and what you're selling is a writing credit for a writer, not a magazine for a reader. There were so many good little journals out there well before you could conveniently charge a credit card to submit work. We're to believe that you can't survive without it, when they did for decades?
The job of magazine publishers is to find readers and funders. Any business or nonprofit needs to market itself, but editors don't seem to want to do that. So few seem to put more effort into that than they do into justifying their exploitation of authors. This long essay seems to indicate you're no exception. How much effort you've put into this tells me that you know in your heart this isn't justified. You need to rationalize it to yourself.
Given your own accounting of your expenses and your income, it's laughable to say "you" pay your authors. It's your customers--authors who want a shot at being published--who are paying them.
But why bother with all that *work* of marketing a sustainable publication when you and your peers can instead collude to dictate the market (i.e., one that charges your producers for the privilege of you reading us)?
Becky, I'm frankly upset at you giving this crap a platform.
I’d like to know how much of your own time you offer to the mags that need help? Do you read 10-20 hours a month for them for free? Have you done layout because you “love it?” As someone who has worked on both sides of this “debate,” I’ve found it’s often the people who have not stayed up until 3 am for weeks on end to make a magazine exist who bark the loudest.
So why is it that submissions fees are exclusive to the literary genre? There are science fiction and fantasy magazines out there with strong literary inclinations that DON'T charge fees. The difference? They run funding mechanisms that aren't dependent upon the kindness of corporate sponsors.
Or--for a contest example. Two novel contests, the Self Published Science Fiction Competition, the Self Published Fantasy Blog Off, and a new competition for novellas that starts up this fall. 300 books. All volunteer. No monetary prizes.
Either literary genre folx don't possess the dedication of genre folx, or they need to get off their rears and figure out how to replicate the SFF process.
Excuse me, we are not discussing visual arts. There is an entire tradition in writing where the money should flow to the writer, not the writer paying for publication. In fact, submission fees flies in the face of writing tradition.
Self-publishing is an entirely different situation, because in that case the author is also acting as the publisher and has control over all aspects of their work's production and promotion. The author has agency in this case. Not so for the writer paying a submission fee only to be rejected.
Note: I am a "hybrid writer." I have traditional, small press magazine publishing credits as well as self-publishing credits. I will take everything I produce to self-publication before I pay submission fees for my short work--which is something I'm starting to do anyway due to the large volume of AI submissions and the current contraction of the publishing market.
i just want to say, you are acting like Christine Maul Rice is a saint for doing this. this is her chosen "profession" this is what editors do. all this article proved is that she does her job badly. complaining about grants, not getting backers, paying too much for internet. its just bad. plus those FAKE testimonials from her editors which just prove that 1) they don't know how to do their job and 2) the propaganda in trying to normalize writers paying to submit. which is even crazier in this time where the internet has basically made lit mags obsolete. if you don't believe me, you are reading this comment on the internet. this is really just privileged upper crust BS.
It just kills me how riled up so many of y’all are getting about lit mags and their fees when y’all also have all the answers. Yes, go forth and self publish for free! Why are you all so invested in making this a fight when you have the answers. Opt out. Do it for free! Sow your wild successes and rub our noses in it! Right? Right.
Hi Lauren. I do! I submit to the hundreds of litmags (and my publisher) who don't charge fees and yet survive. It isn't easy for them, but it's part of the job. I have had four books and over 200 pieces published and paid for, without paying a penny in submission fees or publication costs. Oh, and I've won thousands of dollars and other fantastic prizes (a holiday in Rome, for example) from my writing competitions and literary award wins (33 so far!) , none of which required an entry fee. Where would you like your nose to be rubbed?
hey lauren. thanks for your reply to my comment. I actually run a small press and support myself through my writing. i actually have a podcast where i just talked about this. if you would like to come on my show and debate me over this, i would love to hear what you have to say. I don't charge submission fees and i don't try to lure the wealthy into backing my projects. i actually make money by selling product. so yeah, i have all the answers. let me know if you want to come on my show.
Heck yeah! Love this. Prefer to switch to email for any of that arranging though. Also prefer the tone of the second message here so if the debate is respectful I’m in. If it’s a gotcha attempt style of I WIN, then I’m not. So, up to you really. It’s my full name @gmail
Lauren, your comment was sarcastic and asked a question - you can't blame people for answering it. As for taking it up wiith Christine, I have, but you did ask a question, so...
I agree, especially since the literary genre is the ONLY genre that charges submission fees.
What about all those small press genre literary magazines? Gee, perhaps instead of depending on the kindness of nonprofits, they...run Patreons. Kickstarters. Other funding methodologies.
I'm not, but 1) they are getting a terrible deal if that's what they're paying, which goes to my point about bad business practices enabled by easy money from authors. 2) $2,000 a year isn't actually that big an expense for a small business
No, I think you're on the cusp of seeing how a capitalist system functions. Attacking the individuals working within the system to provide a venue for others without seriously critiquing the structure under which they operate does nothing to move the conversation forward. There are bad actors profiting ruthlessly off their 'customers,' but to throw everyone under the bus simply for existing within a broken system is just as ruthless and short-sighted as the profiteers themselves.
No. In a healthy literary culture, it would be understood that the role of publishers and magazines is to provide capital and market authors to audiences. But too many “small publishers” are in fact selling the idea of being a successful or prize winning writer, not actually selling writing to readers.
As I said in my initial comment, many examples have already been given in LMN in the last 2 weeks, I don’t want to rehash them all right now. But if the qualifiers bother you I will say that all publishers charging reading fees of any sort are engaged in an illegitimate business practice that ought to be shamed out of existence. I’ll further add that just because people pay the fees doesn’t make them legitimate; no one holds a gun to your head for most scams.
I think this model is not confined to the publishing industry; and a critique of the entire system would be much more beneficial than plucking individual examples, whether it's "too many," "many," some, or just a few, and holding them up for scrutiny for everyone to jeer at. The model may indeed be a scam as you suggest but it is the system we currently all agree to participate in and have propagated for centuries.
I appreciate the transparency of Christine's essay. I also understand that writing grants is the pits and barely seems useful. That said, as a former Administrator of a non-profit, I also know that there are ways to appeal to the philanthropically-minded that extend beyond the usual sources of money. Our community center survived at some level thanks to a Board of Directors that basically paid for the honor of advising us. We also organized a lot of events. It is exhausting work but that's what being a nonprofit takes. Should magazines be nonprofit? Has anyone considered a more entrepreneurial approach to lit mags? Added to that is the difficulty of the contemporary landscape: lit mags seem to be like islands in a river during the spring melt: losing ground rapidly. There seem to be less serious readers (does anyone really know?), less space for more entrants in the scene. Everyone wants to be a lit mag editor, but no one wants to create a workable business plan. I wish Hypertext well and I thank its Founding Editor for her willingness to tell us about her situation. I still hate pay to play.
Another way to look at author fees is to see them as an expression of who considers the lit magazine valuable. Writers, artists, designers, and editors pay with free labor and fees because they (we) are the ones who believe the slow, steady hum of literary production is necessary to produce the gems. We might even see literature like public education: a free society depends on art and education for every person, not just those who can buy it. If we believe that, then writer fees and editorial contributions of labor tell us who is paying to keep the arts open and available to all. Patreon is a good idea, but it’s likely that any given editor is already so stretched that even the “simple” initiation of a campaign is one hopeful task too many. (I speak as a former small-press editor-publisher.) Editors are not just exhausted; after being told too many times to go it alone, they may need infusions of hope from outside the masthead. Perhaps a writer could negotiate to replace an author fee with volunteer work to start the magazine’s Patreon. Even crazier, maybe veteran groups and literary groups should get together and talk about what it takes to keep people free. But please don’t ask the editor to initiate that meeting. She’s booked til 2034. “God bless us, every one.”
To those of you who commented respectfully and in good faith: I am grateful and I hear your concerns. Whether you agreed or disagreed with my opinions, I thank you for taking time to respond thoughtfully and honestly.
But damnit, I feel compelled to stick up for myself.
I’ve been blogging for a few decades now and, as a woman, I’m used to bullies on comment threads threatening my physically, telling me how to run my business, how to dress, how to write, how to think, how to talk, how to walk, how to parent, how to chew gum, etc. This is nothing new but I was hoping that, on Substack, the discourse would be more respectful.
When you write an opinion piece, you put yourself in a vulnerable position. I get that. I expect disagreement. Hell, I WELCOME disagreement. But when you start insulting me personally, I have to push back. My opinion is not ‘trash’ and I am not ‘lazy.’ This kind of online bullying is why many people don’t speak up. It shuts down good faith discourse. Check yourself. You don’t have to resort to insults and meanness to make a point.
Christine, this is my fault, as moderator here. I've been reading the comments as they've come in but you are right to point out that a few are excessively and needlessly hostile. (At least one comment was edited from its original version to make the language even more combative, and I missed that it had been edited.) Differences of opinion are always welcome and can lead to any number of constructive outcomes. Insults are not welcome or constructive. Nor do you deserve them. I remain grateful for your contribution here and the important insights you provide about the work of lit mag publishing. I'll keep a closer watch on all comments moving forward.
Thank you for this behind the scenes, honest posting about submission fees. I especially appreciated and was saddened to read your account of other well-known publications unable to hang on. I know many people disagree. I do feel there is a difference between nominal submission fees and contest fees. I feel that there are journals that charge exorbitant fees for contest and as a former first reader, I know that hundreds of people enter contests. This is a debate that will continue, as it should - open, polite discourse is free speech. Anyone writing a Substack or any form of self-publishing understands the work that is required to produce quality, build a community, and manage all the balls in the air.
Why the double standard between agents and magazines? Authors are, rightly, unanimously opposed to agents charging reading fees. Most agents could give the same song and dance that we just read above about their expenses, barely scraping by, etc. (without mentioning the part about how this is probably a reflection on their inability to find a market).
Yet so many writers make excuses for these editors who are either incapable or unwillig to do the same work of finding an audience.
The difference is that the substack subscription models relies on readers choosing to fund a newsletter. If your substack was funded by telling aspiring writers that you *might* publish them if they pay you, that would be more similar to what Hypertext Magazine and others are doing.
If a literary magazine can't convince readers to pay a nominal fee, what are the chances that the stories and essays being published are even being read by more than a few dozen people?
Brilliant accounting of the stark realities Christine. I hope those who are upset by this look at Poetry Magazine and their history. It tracks these same lines. They worked out of a closet and often didn’t have money to even mail the subscriptions to people. They scraped. They almost closed a lot. Then whammo,
the heavens opened and they got a huge endowment that changed EVERYTHING for them.
In a perfect world, the Arts would be funded and writers would be paid decently for their published work. We don't live in that world. Any submission fees I pay are my contribution to sustain a publication in which I would love to see my byline. I am in awe of the many editors who run publications on their own dime.
Well and thoughtfully written. I am always fine with paying a submission fee of reasonable amount. I've stopped sending to some places as the prices have gotten higher.
Thanks for a bit of insight on the publishing world. I have been meaning to publish some of my own work, and now I understand a bit more about the process. Thank you.
Christine: charge away. We all have to eat. You're providing a service. You should be paid for it. Writers have always had to struggle; it's often the same for those who publish writing in small fora. As long as you're not gouging us, charge away--without guilt!
Thank you for clarifying your challenges and the complexities of this issue. One barrier is that the US is not a country of readers, and this is reflected in the paucity of commercially successful literary magazines (The New Yorker, and....?) Your thoughts about this?
Sorry, but charging fees is an inherently exploitative and illegitimate practice. When you do that, the author is your customer, not your producer or collaborator, and what you're selling is a writing credit for a writer, not a magazine for a reader. There were so many good little journals out there well before you could conveniently charge a credit card to submit work. We're to believe that you can't survive without it, when they did for decades?
The job of magazine publishers is to find readers and funders. Any business or nonprofit needs to market itself, but editors don't seem to want to do that. So few seem to put more effort into that than they do into justifying their exploitation of authors. This long essay seems to indicate you're no exception. How much effort you've put into this tells me that you know in your heart this isn't justified. You need to rationalize it to yourself.
Given your own accounting of your expenses and your income, it's laughable to say "you" pay your authors. It's your customers--authors who want a shot at being published--who are paying them.
But why bother with all that *work* of marketing a sustainable publication when you and your peers can instead collude to dictate the market (i.e., one that charges your producers for the privilege of you reading us)?
Becky, I'm frankly upset at you giving this crap a platform.
I’d like to know how much of your own time you offer to the mags that need help? Do you read 10-20 hours a month for them for free? Have you done layout because you “love it?” As someone who has worked on both sides of this “debate,” I’ve found it’s often the people who have not stayed up until 3 am for weeks on end to make a magazine exist who bark the loudest.
Sorry, but there's a big difference between working for free and charging someone so that they can do work for you.
So why is it that submissions fees are exclusive to the literary genre? There are science fiction and fantasy magazines out there with strong literary inclinations that DON'T charge fees. The difference? They run funding mechanisms that aren't dependent upon the kindness of corporate sponsors.
Or--for a contest example. Two novel contests, the Self Published Science Fiction Competition, the Self Published Fantasy Blog Off, and a new competition for novellas that starts up this fall. 300 books. All volunteer. No monetary prizes.
Either literary genre folx don't possess the dedication of genre folx, or they need to get off their rears and figure out how to replicate the SFF process.
Great question. I will say in the visual arts there are also sub fees.
I also want to note that self-publishing is also a hot topic too with its own set of issues.
Excuse me, we are not discussing visual arts. There is an entire tradition in writing where the money should flow to the writer, not the writer paying for publication. In fact, submission fees flies in the face of writing tradition.
Self-publishing is an entirely different situation, because in that case the author is also acting as the publisher and has control over all aspects of their work's production and promotion. The author has agency in this case. Not so for the writer paying a submission fee only to be rejected.
Note: I am a "hybrid writer." I have traditional, small press magazine publishing credits as well as self-publishing credits. I will take everything I produce to self-publication before I pay submission fees for my short work--which is something I'm starting to do anyway due to the large volume of AI submissions and the current contraction of the publishing market.
i just want to say, you are acting like Christine Maul Rice is a saint for doing this. this is her chosen "profession" this is what editors do. all this article proved is that she does her job badly. complaining about grants, not getting backers, paying too much for internet. its just bad. plus those FAKE testimonials from her editors which just prove that 1) they don't know how to do their job and 2) the propaganda in trying to normalize writers paying to submit. which is even crazier in this time where the internet has basically made lit mags obsolete. if you don't believe me, you are reading this comment on the internet. this is really just privileged upper crust BS.
It just kills me how riled up so many of y’all are getting about lit mags and their fees when y’all also have all the answers. Yes, go forth and self publish for free! Why are you all so invested in making this a fight when you have the answers. Opt out. Do it for free! Sow your wild successes and rub our noses in it! Right? Right.
Hi Lauren. I do! I submit to the hundreds of litmags (and my publisher) who don't charge fees and yet survive. It isn't easy for them, but it's part of the job. I have had four books and over 200 pieces published and paid for, without paying a penny in submission fees or publication costs. Oh, and I've won thousands of dollars and other fantastic prizes (a holiday in Rome, for example) from my writing competitions and literary award wins (33 so far!) , none of which required an entry fee. Where would you like your nose to be rubbed?
You make an assumption that I have not also won, am winning, and do these things myself. You know what they say about assumptions.
I've made no assumptions about you at all.
hey lauren. thanks for your reply to my comment. I actually run a small press and support myself through my writing. i actually have a podcast where i just talked about this. if you would like to come on my show and debate me over this, i would love to hear what you have to say. I don't charge submission fees and i don't try to lure the wealthy into backing my projects. i actually make money by selling product. so yeah, i have all the answers. let me know if you want to come on my show.
But really maybe you should be asking Christine since you have the issue with her…? I no longer run a publication.
sure! id love to talk with her too. ill try to reach out.
Heck yeah! Love this. Prefer to switch to email for any of that arranging though. Also prefer the tone of the second message here so if the debate is respectful I’m in. If it’s a gotcha attempt style of I WIN, then I’m not. So, up to you really. It’s my full name @gmail
Lauren, your comment was sarcastic and asked a question - you can't blame people for answering it. As for taking it up wiith Christine, I have, but you did ask a question, so...
It's also worth noting that Submittable is not necessary to run a literary magazine.
I agree, especially since the literary genre is the ONLY genre that charges submission fees.
What about all those small press genre literary magazines? Gee, perhaps instead of depending on the kindness of nonprofits, they...run Patreons. Kickstarters. Other funding methodologies.
It’s almost as if the material conditions under which these magazines operate have changed over the past several decades!
You're right, now they can publish online virtually for free, instead of having to pay thousands every month in printing and mailing costs.
Did you even read the article? Web hosting and publishing are far from free. The article details how costs have risen significantly.
Paying for hosting fees is far less than paying to produce, print, and mail magazines.
It's costing them literally dozens of dollars
I’m not saying that it isn’t cheaper than print, I’m saying that web publishing isn’t free.
Of course, but why should aspiring writers be the ones to pay for them to host their magazine?
I meant "virtually free" as in nearly free, not virtually (online) for totally free
I’m glad you’re in the financial position that over $1,000 for six months of web hosting and publishing is virtually free to you
I'm not, but 1) they are getting a terrible deal if that's what they're paying, which goes to my point about bad business practices enabled by easy money from authors. 2) $2,000 a year isn't actually that big an expense for a small business
That's a ridiculous amount to pay. It's more evidence that they aren't financing their litmag wisely.
No, I think you're on the cusp of seeing how a capitalist system functions. Attacking the individuals working within the system to provide a venue for others without seriously critiquing the structure under which they operate does nothing to move the conversation forward. There are bad actors profiting ruthlessly off their 'customers,' but to throw everyone under the bus simply for existing within a broken system is just as ruthless and short-sighted as the profiteers themselves.
No. In a healthy literary culture, it would be understood that the role of publishers and magazines is to provide capital and market authors to audiences. But too many “small publishers” are in fact selling the idea of being a successful or prize winning writer, not actually selling writing to readers.
I think you might find a home for an essay on "healthy literary culture," and it could be illuminating to yourself and others.
When you use qualifiers like "too many" without evidence or examples it releases all the air out of your argument.
As I said in my initial comment, many examples have already been given in LMN in the last 2 weeks, I don’t want to rehash them all right now. But if the qualifiers bother you I will say that all publishers charging reading fees of any sort are engaged in an illegitimate business practice that ought to be shamed out of existence. I’ll further add that just because people pay the fees doesn’t make them legitimate; no one holds a gun to your head for most scams.
I think this model is not confined to the publishing industry; and a critique of the entire system would be much more beneficial than plucking individual examples, whether it's "too many," "many," some, or just a few, and holding them up for scrutiny for everyone to jeer at. The model may indeed be a scam as you suggest but it is the system we currently all agree to participate in and have propagated for centuries.
In fact the rise of reading fees has only become standard practice in the last ten years. Before that it was an outlier
I appreciate the transparency of Christine's essay. I also understand that writing grants is the pits and barely seems useful. That said, as a former Administrator of a non-profit, I also know that there are ways to appeal to the philanthropically-minded that extend beyond the usual sources of money. Our community center survived at some level thanks to a Board of Directors that basically paid for the honor of advising us. We also organized a lot of events. It is exhausting work but that's what being a nonprofit takes. Should magazines be nonprofit? Has anyone considered a more entrepreneurial approach to lit mags? Added to that is the difficulty of the contemporary landscape: lit mags seem to be like islands in a river during the spring melt: losing ground rapidly. There seem to be less serious readers (does anyone really know?), less space for more entrants in the scene. Everyone wants to be a lit mag editor, but no one wants to create a workable business plan. I wish Hypertext well and I thank its Founding Editor for her willingness to tell us about her situation. I still hate pay to play.
Another way to look at author fees is to see them as an expression of who considers the lit magazine valuable. Writers, artists, designers, and editors pay with free labor and fees because they (we) are the ones who believe the slow, steady hum of literary production is necessary to produce the gems. We might even see literature like public education: a free society depends on art and education for every person, not just those who can buy it. If we believe that, then writer fees and editorial contributions of labor tell us who is paying to keep the arts open and available to all. Patreon is a good idea, but it’s likely that any given editor is already so stretched that even the “simple” initiation of a campaign is one hopeful task too many. (I speak as a former small-press editor-publisher.) Editors are not just exhausted; after being told too many times to go it alone, they may need infusions of hope from outside the masthead. Perhaps a writer could negotiate to replace an author fee with volunteer work to start the magazine’s Patreon. Even crazier, maybe veteran groups and literary groups should get together and talk about what it takes to keep people free. But please don’t ask the editor to initiate that meeting. She’s booked til 2034. “God bless us, every one.”
To those of you who commented respectfully and in good faith: I am grateful and I hear your concerns. Whether you agreed or disagreed with my opinions, I thank you for taking time to respond thoughtfully and honestly.
But damnit, I feel compelled to stick up for myself.
I’ve been blogging for a few decades now and, as a woman, I’m used to bullies on comment threads threatening my physically, telling me how to run my business, how to dress, how to write, how to think, how to talk, how to walk, how to parent, how to chew gum, etc. This is nothing new but I was hoping that, on Substack, the discourse would be more respectful.
When you write an opinion piece, you put yourself in a vulnerable position. I get that. I expect disagreement. Hell, I WELCOME disagreement. But when you start insulting me personally, I have to push back. My opinion is not ‘trash’ and I am not ‘lazy.’ This kind of online bullying is why many people don’t speak up. It shuts down good faith discourse. Check yourself. You don’t have to resort to insults and meanness to make a point.
Christine, this is my fault, as moderator here. I've been reading the comments as they've come in but you are right to point out that a few are excessively and needlessly hostile. (At least one comment was edited from its original version to make the language even more combative, and I missed that it had been edited.) Differences of opinion are always welcome and can lead to any number of constructive outcomes. Insults are not welcome or constructive. Nor do you deserve them. I remain grateful for your contribution here and the important insights you provide about the work of lit mag publishing. I'll keep a closer watch on all comments moving forward.
Thank you for this behind the scenes, honest posting about submission fees. I especially appreciated and was saddened to read your account of other well-known publications unable to hang on. I know many people disagree. I do feel there is a difference between nominal submission fees and contest fees. I feel that there are journals that charge exorbitant fees for contest and as a former first reader, I know that hundreds of people enter contests. This is a debate that will continue, as it should - open, polite discourse is free speech. Anyone writing a Substack or any form of self-publishing understands the work that is required to produce quality, build a community, and manage all the balls in the air.
Why the double standard between agents and magazines? Authors are, rightly, unanimously opposed to agents charging reading fees. Most agents could give the same song and dance that we just read above about their expenses, barely scraping by, etc. (without mentioning the part about how this is probably a reflection on their inability to find a market).
Yet so many writers make excuses for these editors who are either incapable or unwillig to do the same work of finding an audience.
The difference is that the substack subscription models relies on readers choosing to fund a newsletter. If your substack was funded by telling aspiring writers that you *might* publish them if they pay you, that would be more similar to what Hypertext Magazine and others are doing.
If a literary magazine can't convince readers to pay a nominal fee, what are the chances that the stories and essays being published are even being read by more than a few dozen people?
Brilliant accounting of the stark realities Christine. I hope those who are upset by this look at Poetry Magazine and their history. It tracks these same lines. They worked out of a closet and often didn’t have money to even mail the subscriptions to people. They scraped. They almost closed a lot. Then whammo,
the heavens opened and they got a huge endowment that changed EVERYTHING for them.
In a perfect world, the Arts would be funded and writers would be paid decently for their published work. We don't live in that world. Any submission fees I pay are my contribution to sustain a publication in which I would love to see my byline. I am in awe of the many editors who run publications on their own dime.
Thank you, Christine, for writing this.
Well and thoughtfully written. I am always fine with paying a submission fee of reasonable amount. I've stopped sending to some places as the prices have gotten higher.
Thanks for a bit of insight on the publishing world. I have been meaning to publish some of my own work, and now I understand a bit more about the process. Thank you.
Good stuff
I appreciate this article. It's hard to understand the pressures on literary organizations unless you have an inside perspective.
Christine: charge away. We all have to eat. You're providing a service. You should be paid for it. Writers have always had to struggle; it's often the same for those who publish writing in small fora. As long as you're not gouging us, charge away--without guilt!
I should add that windfall came from a writer who was rejected repeatedly from the magazine. No I don’t know if she paid fees (but fees aren’t new).
This was hugely helpful in its transparency.