The following is the July Literary Journal Editor E-Panel, with interviews of editors of another 8 great Literary Journals.
Eli Horowitz – McSweeney’s
Thom Didado – Failbetter
Ravi Shankar – Drunken Boat
Steve Erickson – Black Clock
Bradford Morrow – Conjunctions
Charles Valle – Fence
Charles Valle is a Photo Researcher in educational publishing by day and the Managing Editor of Fence Magazine, Inc.
Fence was launched in the spring of 1998. A biannual journal of poetry, fiction, art and criticism, Fence has a mission to publish challenging writing and art distinguished by idiosyncrasy and intelligence rather than by allegiance with camps, schools, or cliques. Fence has published works by some of the most esteemed contemporary writers as well as excellent work by complete unknowns. It is part of our mission to support young writers who might otherwise have difficulty being recognized because their work doesn't "fit in" to either the mainstream or to accepted modes of experimentation.
Steven A. Dolgin – The MacGuffin
www.schoolcraft.cc.mi.us/macguffin/default.htm
Dinty W. Moore – Brevity
Any situation where an editor is not listed after a question with a response is due to the editor choosing not to reply to that particular question.
Dan:
Thanks for taking some time out of what must be a busy schedule to get the word out about Literary Journals!
Ravi Shankar - Drunken Boat:
Yes, even the summer doldrums seem strung out on amphetamines when teaching supplements creative practice, editing a literary journal, going to multiple weddings and trying to grow a lawn. No amount of sun or water seems to help! I was hoping to read Remembrance of Things Past this summer, but it looks like it might be another Proustless year.
Bradford Morrow - Conjunctions:
Pleased to participate.
Charles Valle - Fence:
No problem.
Steven A. Dolgin - The MacGuffin:
There seems to be more writers than readers and this is tough on small press literary magazines. The MacGuffin is about 20 years old, a national magazine that is now published three times a year. Perhaps like most editors, I appreciate your efforts to get names and information out there for writers and readers.
Dinty W. Moore – Brevity:
Happy to be a part of your panel.
Dan:
I know some of you took over positions and others founded their journals. What exactly led to your taking on the position you currently hold with your Literary Journal?
Eli Horowitz - McSweeneys:
I was working as a volunteer carpenter for our pirate store/tutoring center. One thing led to another. It was pretty flukey.
Thom Didato - Failbetter:
During failbetter's first years, I was spending my days in an office within the larger publishing world -- where I saw editors do little if any editing (nor were most free to choose want they really wanted to publish). Thus, I think like most editors who choose the lit mag route, my involvement in failbetter was one of the heart. Several of our friends had started up traditional print publications, only to go belly-up after an issue or two. Chastened by their examples, we chose to go online, because we figured the ease and low cost of web publishing would enable us to avoid their fate, and stick it out for the long haul.
Of course, my colleagues and I had no idea what we were getting into--we had our inspirational quote from Mr. Beckett, a rather eclectic editorial slant, and the understanding that under no circumstances would we, writers ourselves, publish our own work. And that was it.
Ravi Shankar - Drunken Boat:
I founded Drunken Boat nearly five years ago. The apocryphal story, which happens to be true, is that my old friend and visual artist Michael Mills and I were sitting on a rooftop in Brooklyn, fresh from finishing graduate school, saddled with ideas and loans, and in the course of lamenting the lack of opportunities for incipient writers and artists, we hit upon the idea that dot come would be the Park Avenue of the internet still had cache, and I was planning to put my personal site up there. Instead we decided to start a journal with work from friends and solicited web art and poems from artists and poets we admired.
Steve Erickson - Black Clock
I was approached by the California Institute of the Arts to come up with not a campus literary magazine but a national literary magazine that, for the institute’s purposes, might have the effect of promoting the CalArts Writing Program in the same way that, say, Conjunctions does for Bard College. I had been teaching in the writing program at CalArts for a couple of years and I think the institute’s hope was that as editor I might be able to attract some writers of renown to the project. My main stipulation was that I would have complete editorial autonomy, which I’ve received, within the bounds of the financing that CalArts provides, which of course is limited as these things always are. So the magazine was founded by the school, and by Jon Wagner in particular, who was then head of the Writing Program, and from that point on I wasn’t just allowed but encouraged to fashion it in whatever image I chose.
Bradford Morrow - Conjunctions:
Back when I was in my late twenties, I was living in Santa Barbara and had befriended the poet and polymath Kenneth Rexroth who was half a century my senior. We often sat in his book barn in Montecito and talked about everything from jazz to politics to poetry, and one day we happened to be talking about what a crucial contribution to American literature James Laughlin, the founder of New Directions, had made. Pound, Williams—the list of writers he published is long. Kenneth and I thought a festschrift in Laughlin’s honor would be a great thing. I sent out about eighty letters of invitation and was astonished when I got back responses from nearly everyone. This became the first issue of Conjunctions. Unfortunately, Kenneth had a stroke while we were beginning to work on the issue in earnest and I was left to a steep learning curve and full responsibility from the outset. I founded Conjunctions in 1980 and the first issue came out the following year. I’ve continued to edit the journal since.
Charles Valle - Fence:
I actually interned for Fence the summer before graduating from Notre Dame's MFA program. Until 2003, Brett Fletcher Lauer handled most of the administrative duties for Fence. When he stepped down, Rebecca called me up and offered me the Managing Editor position. Initially, I took the position with the intent of starting my own journal/press in three years. Fence fascinated me in that it seemed to function as a lightning rod of sorts.
Steven A. Dolgin - The MacGuffin:
I took over the magazine about three years ago after the retirement of the founding editor. The magazine is housed at Schoolcraft College in Livonia, Michigan where I am Professor of English and teach many of the creative writing courses.
Dinty W. Moore – Brevity:
I founded BREVITY, eight years ago. So, I'm pretty much stuck with the job for as long as I want to keep BREVITY alive.
Dan:
I don’t know if you can hear the collective laughter over the internet, but is it safe to say you do this out of love, and it wasn’t some get rich quick scheme?
Eli Horowitz - McSweeneys:
If I work here just ten more years, the stock options kick in, and then once the venture capitalists give us the cash infusion, I'll flip my shares and finally hire my own pedicurist.
Thom Didato - Failbetter:
We like to think of it as a solid "stay poor" scheme.
Ravi Shankar - Drunken Boat:
This burro’s back is nearly broke from labors of love, but indeed though it was conceptualized as a collective that might eventually help fund its contributions, it soon become apparent that no one would be making any money on this endeavor. Which is why it’s so crucial, especially in this early stage of web publication, for readers to help fund the journal/organization in question. On more than a few occasions, labors of the table have preceded our ability to keep with the editorial end of things. We did become a 501(‘c)(3k) non-profit organization, so all donations are tax-deductible, and if only I had four more hours each day, I’d be researching grants.
Steve Erickson - Black Clock
Yeah, that is pretty hilarious. No one’s making money off of this, including the publishers and including, I should add, the writers who have contributed, many of whom — Don DeLillo, David Foster Wallace, Richard Powers, Joanna Scott, Jonathan Lethem, Rick Moody, Aimee Bender, Greil Marcus, Miranda July, William Vollmann, Darcey Steinke, quite a few others — can certainly sell their work elsewhere.
Bradford Morrow - Conjunctions:
The laugh would be on anyone who’d think of editing a literary journal—especially one that’s devoted to publishing innovative and often formally difficult fiction and poetry—as a get rich quick scheme. I suppose it’s done out of love, but also because it strikes me as a necessary, needful part of a life devoted to literature. At least, it’s that way for me.
Charles Valle - Fence:
Yeah, that collective laughter's a bitch... I like the point where "not-for-profit small press/literary journal" starts sounding normal-- it reminds me that we are all a little mad-- that there is a passion driving us (the readers, editors, writers, and scenesters) to keep the
community going. Poetry and literary fiction's positions in the trade industry's periphery serve as very real markers. Actively incorporating as a 501(c)(3), operating with near-non-existent capital, a limited circulation, an all-volunteer staff (all of whom work full-time), all while attempting to engage with corporate distribution systems-- it's fiscal suicide. Fence loses money with each issue we print. I think Fence's visibility tends to obfuscate the independent nature of our "enterprise." When an individual or group commits to that level of vulnerability (in the sense of time, money,
personal/social/aesthetic/ethic scrutiny) with the understanding of the impossibility of material rewards (money, fame, etc.), one cannot help but think of love or insanity.
Steven A. Dolgin - The MacGuffin:
A little of both. The process of keeping the magazine afloat, managing the volumes of submissions, and trying continuously to increase subscription base and local distribution is not worth the small stipend I receive for accepting the title of editor--but I am fond of many of the challenges. It's an ongoing process of problem finding and problem solving. I must give credit to Ms. Nausheen Khan, Managing Editor and the rest of our editorial staff for doing a majority of the work. I would guess that their motives are more altruistic than mine.
Dinty W. Moore – Brevity:
It actually costs me money, not to mention a large amount of unreimbursed time, so yes, I do it purely for love.
Dan:
In order to run a Literary Journal, do you believe you need to have knowledge of literature, or business, or some mixture of the two? Would it be helpful if more truly business astute people were involved in the running of such journals?
Eli Horowitz - McSweeneys:
Some mixture of the two, and also some understanding of production, and printing, and bookstores -- all that helps. However, I didn't have any of that, so I guess nothing is too necessary.
Thom Didato - Failbetter:
Here, I'll take off my failbetter hat, and speak from the vantage point of but my paying day job as a Program Manager for the Council of Literary Magazines and Presses (CLMP). CLMP exists, chiefly, because folks may have the editorial expertise but usually lack the know-how when it comes to the business aspects of running a literary magazine or press -- i.e., distribution, marketing, non-profit status, etc. Quite often you see folks put out a great debut issue only to soon be discouraged by the business -- then their passion for the project dries up and so too does their glorious publication.
Now, when it comes to failbetter, an online magazine, some of those traditional print mag business aspects (e.g., distribution to book stores) do not apply. Nevertheless, any publishing endeavor must address the practical financial aspects of their business in order to ensure that the publication becomes something more than a mere personal artistic endeavor. In the end, it is indeed useful (if not required) to have the both the literary passion and the professional biz background/know-how.
Ravi Shankar – Drunken Boat:
A combination would certainly be ideal. Poets can’t crunch numbers, let alone project growth and revenue in concordance with marketing plans. I would love to have a strictly financial person at the journal (that’s a sincere to anyone out there that’s available and interested), because we have amazing content but too few financial channels to recompense either the readers of the staff.
Steve Erickson - Black Clock
I don’t know. We’ve had to learn a lot on the run. I came to this as someone with no knowledge whatsoever of business and whose knowledge of literature gets very spotty after, say, Marquez. This is where our two Senior Editors, Dwayne Moser and Bruce Bauman, have been indispensable. It was Bruce, for instance, who introduced me to writers like Joanna Scott and Rebecca Goldstein — I was moderating a panel at the Los Angeles Times Book Festival when Bruce showed up with Joanna. Besides being a first-rate novelist in his own right, Bruce reads a lot of contemporary stuff and knows a lot of people, and over the course of the first four issues I would say there’s been at least half a dozen excellent writers we’ve published just through Bruce. Dwayne is that rare instance of someone who’s a terrific artist — he’s doing the cover for our fifth issue and has had a number of shows in L.A. and New York and London, and just sold a couple of big paintings to the Charles Saatchi collection — and is also utterly indispensable in terms of just making the damn trains run on time. Very frankly Black Clock wouldn’t have made it past the first issue without him. He’s taught himself enough about distribution and printing schedules and has kept a wary enough eye on the money so as to handle virtually all of the business stuff. Then there’s our Art Director, Gail Swanlund, who’s not only a brilliant designer and completely invented the visual look of the magazine but probably knows more about putting out a magazine than the other three of us combined. So my point is that I’ve been uncommonly lucky to work with people whose combination of aesthetic sense and business sense exceeds my own.
Bradford Morrow - Conjunctions:
I can think of a number of important journals that made an impact, even a lasting impact, which were launched by writers who didn’t have the business savvy god gave an apple. But I can’t think of one edited by a businessman that caused more than a ripple before settling back into the ether. It does help, though, to have some skills about basic business if the journal’s going to have a chance to survive, grow, even thrive. The bottom line is, the editor has to have a particular literary vision, and the knowledge that grounds or feeds that vision, for the journal to have any meaning.
Charles Valle - Fence:
Balance, I hear, is the key to everything. Fence has been blessed with amazing editors throughout its 8 year history; I am certain that is the main reason for its longevity. However, I think we could all benefit from refining our business acumen for sure.
Steven A. Dolgin - The MacGuffin:
It requires business sense and a feel for the literature. The creative work would not find its way into print without attention to the business of publishing. This came as a rude awakening for me when I first took over The MacGuffin.
Dinty W. Moore – Brevity:
Well, for BREVITY, which only exists on the Internet, there is little business acumen needed -- we have no advertising revenues, no subscription revenues. Perhaps if I were a better businessperson, I would have figured out by now how to make money from the magazine, but I don' think the tremendous effort involved would finally play off. So for now, my sense of what is happening in the creative nonfiction arena is my best asset.
Dan:
Where does the funding for your journal come from? A university? Patrons? Subscribers? Fundraisers?
Eli Horowitz - McSweeneys:
All from bookstore sales and subscribers.
Thom Didato - Failbetter:
One benefit of an online publication is that overhead is extremely low (no print runs, shipping costs, returns, etc!) What the majority of folks don't seem to realize is that 99 percent of the literary magazines out there do not make a profit (even with their academic affiliations/support). Most journals spend a good deal of their time seeking public and private funds to try and offset their ever-growing overhead. We here at failbetter just limit or simply avoid that overhead. This goes against the typical financial operation of print journal.
In the weird world of public funding for literary magazines, typically a journal must demonstrate/document their income in order to obtain government grants (even if your expenditures continue to dwarf that income, which for the majority of print journals is often the case). While failbetter generates income from book sales via Powells and some private initiatives, all such funds go right back into the marketing machine (thus, no one here makes penny). Nevertheless, as we begin to print an annual print edition, failbetter is obtaining more private/public funds/grants.
Ravi Shankar – Drunken Boat:
For a long time, it was out of our pockets. We currently have a New York State Council for the Arts grant, which is very useful. It’s the first grant of that kind we’ve gotten, partially as a result of being online. For many arts organizations, it’s difficult to justify giving funding to an online endeavor, because what geographic area do they service? My answer is that you can have a physical presence in a city, as we do in New York, giving readings and performances, providing educational materials, WHILE connecting a particular population with readers and artists around the world. But it’s hard to convince funders set in their ways. We’re running our first annual PanLiterary Awards (deadline is August 15th for work in a variety of genres –poetry, nonfiction, fiction, photo/video, web art, and sound – see http://www.drunkenboat.com for details). In our last issue we experimented with an optional donation of $2, but that resulted in a paltry sum that didn’t fully defray the cost of coffee, let alone our hosting space. We encourage patrons of the arts to help with our mission, as not only are all donations tax-deductible but we feel poised on the brink of a media arts revolution. Sustainability is crucial and can only be attained through the help of those who care about the arts.
Steve Erickson - Black Clock
Yes.
Bradford Morrow - Conjunctions:
All the above. Subscribers are so important.
Charles Valle - Fence:
That's a good question. We have a sizable subscriber base, though a significant percentage of the subscriptions come from our two book contests. Unlike most book contests, we offer entrants the choice of a 1-year subscription or a copy of the winning book to offset the price of the $20 entry fee. A large majority choose the subscription.
Individual contributions, though few, have been instrumental to Fence's survival; we are very grateful for all the generous people. Fence had early success with fundraisers-- though the past few years have been busts (money-wise anyway). I recall reading somewhere that fundraisers, benefits, ad revenues for non-profit presses/journals should be ancillary to development--in the sense of grants. Ideally we would have a development person doing our grant writing. Given the lack of time and human resources, we consider
ourselves very fortunate to receive the grants that we receive.
Steven A. Dolgin - The MacGuffin:
All of the above!
Dinty W. Moore – Brevity:
Until this past year, it all came from my pocket. Lately, we have begun to receive some donations, and will begin paying the writers a small honorarium with the next issue. We get a “very” small amount of kickback from Amazon, when people buy books through our site, and that helps with web hosting and other incidentals.
Dan:
How do you decide how many issues to publish of each issue? Does the greater percentage get sent off to subscribers?
Eli Horowitz - McSweeneys:
It's mostly determined by how many we sold of the previous issue. These days more are sold individually at stores than to subscribers.
Thom Didato – Failbetter:
Being online, we don't have this problem. Once an issue is up, it is accessible for the masses to read. This is true not only for the current issue but for all past issues as well (all archived online). And if failbetter should ever go the way of the dodo, rest assured we will continue to be available thanks to the New York Public Library's LOCKSS ("Lots of Copies Keep Stuff Safe") project . This project brings together a growing number of libraries and publishers interested in preserving & archiving online journals.
Ravi Shankar - Drunken Boat:
Since we’re exclusively online, this is a moot point.
Steve Erickson - Black Clock
From the first issue we’ve printed what we can afford. Most are sold through independent bookstores, but the subscription list is certainly growing, pretty much in leaps and bounds from issue to issue, and virtually all of the issues have sold out. We keep getting requests for back copies that we don’t have. Once we get some actual money back from our distributor, perhaps we can increase the circulation.
Bradford Morrow - Conjunctions:
We estimate the press run based on the sales of the last issue to some extent, and on advance interest in the current one. The numbers vary from issue to issue. More than half go out to bookstores.
Charles Valle - Fence:
The number of subscribers dictates how many copies of an issue we'll print. The number of copies shipped to our distributors, for the most part, remains constant. Roughly half of our print run goes to subscribers.
Steven A. Dolgin - The MacGuffin:
We cut the press run slightly, from 600 to 500 in order to upgrade fro two to four color. It is a much more appealing magazine. Most copies go to subscribers. We've managed to connect with a Barnes and Noble near the College and have been fortunate over the years to get a small bookstore or art store to carry some copies.
Dinty W. Moore – Brevity:
No response. We don't do print.
Dan:
How do you get bookstores to carry your journal? Do you target independent stores, or big chains, or just regional stores?
Eli Horowitz - McSweeneys:
Our home has always been the independent stores, and we worked to build good
relationships with those booksellers. I think that is really key. They are good people.
Thom Didato - Failbetter:
Marketing is a different animal for us online folk (and that's what bookstore presence is for most print journals...they usually don't make money off those sales). So...how does failbetter "get out there" so to speak? One easy way is to exchange links with other well-respected literary publications (i.e. - go to Ploughshares and you'll find a link to failbetter, and vice versa). Of course we have been fortunate enough to be featured in general listings, public readings, newspaper articles, and reviews in the annual writer publications -- but truthfully the most important key to getting our name out there has been our good fortune to feature the right writers at the right time. For instance, we were fortunate to interview back-to-back Pulitzer Prize winners (Michael Chabon and Richard Russo) just months before each won the award (those were very good "hit" months, indeed). Another timely example was when we published a story by Antonya Nelson and subsequently saw her fiction featured in the New Yorker's next issue. These type of "coincidences" really reap dividends when it comes to drawing readers to the site (and greatly increases the shelf-life of an issue in terms of publicity). failbetter found a home for up-and-coming voices like Sam Lipsyte, Myla Goldberg, and the late Amanda Davis; helped uncover new work from such old names as Ross Bleckner, Dick Davis, Peter Christopher, David Ohle; and interviewed contemporary literary legends in Paul Auster, TC Boyle, Charles Baxter, and Marie Ponsot. Indeed, the interviews (even the old ones) continue to bring us new readers on a daily basis (i.e., someone does a Google search for "interview EL Doctorow" or "Jonathan Lethem" and failbetter pops up.) What this does (and what our server info suggests) is that the reader that clicks on the interview with say, Pam Houston, will continue to click on our pages, and enjoy a poem or a story or more. So you see, readers aren't stumbling upon our publication at the local bookstore, they're goofing off on the internet at work, tracking works by their favorite writer, or simply seeing what the web has to offer in terms of good literary work.
Ravi Shankar – Drunken Boat:
Again, we’re a web journal, though we do have partnerships with print publications and various conferences. And wherever I am, bookstore or bar, I shed announcement cards for each issue like a second skin.
Steve Erickson - Black Clock
We work through a distributor, or what’s really a consortium of distributors, in the San Francisco Bay Area called BigTop. We sell Black Clock in all of those places you mention, but I would guess independent stores are the prime outlet.
Bradford Morrow – Conjunctions:
We get Conjunctions into bookstores through our distributors. Our main distributor is D.A.P., and we work with Small Press Distribution and others.
Charles Valle - Fence:
In certain chains of signification, the term "target" isn't too far away from "precision"--which would be inaccurate in our case. I'd say Fence, in practice, is more of a shotgun scatter. In theory, we would like to take aim at all the independent stores (bookstores, news stands, record stores, comic stores...the retailers that attract more independent-minded consumers). As with the funding question, it would be ideal if we had more time to research and strategize. As it stands we rely on our distributors to get the copies to the big box stores and serendipity to carry us to the smaller stores. [god I suck as Managing Editor]
Dinty W. Moore – Brevity:
No response. We don't do print.
Dan:
Do you consider your journal to be a regional journal or not?
Eli Horowitz - McSweeneys:
Not really.
Thom Didato - Failbetter:
Though failbetter's headquarters is based in Brooklyn, NY, our editors/consultants reside all over the country. Moreover, our writers come from all over the world (though all work is published in English). In fact, just yesterday I was sifting through our "slush" pile and pulled out submissions by writers from Australia, Ireland, Bulgaria, Russia, Indonesia, Chile and more. This means, of course, that failbetter’s readers are quite international as well. For instance, thanks to one little server gizmo, a couple of years ago we discovered that, among our 30,000 regular readers, there is one failbetter fan who resided in the Seychelles. Truth be told, neither myself nor most of my colleagues could find the Seychelles on the office globe, but that's beside the point. We just like the fact that some guy, or girl for that matter, from a funny former French archipelago colony, cares enough to pay us a visit every issue. Indeed, according to our previous webmaster, our readership spans over 60 countries, from Estonia to Brazil, from Norway to Samoa, creating quite an international following. But I must confess we still have a soft spot for our little unidentified friend from the Seychelles. Why? Well, we just like to say, "our friend from the Seychelles." Sounds cool, doesn't it?
Ravi Shankar - Drunken Boat:
Not – we’re international. Though we do have certain narrower focuses like the last issue on Aphasia and the Arts and the forthcoming one in Canadian poets.
Steve Erickson - Black Clock
Not at all. Black Clock is in bookstores from St. Mark’s in Manhattan to Dutton’s in Brentwood.
Bradford Morrow - Conjunctions:
Not at all regional.
Charles Valle - Fence:
I wouldn't consider Fence regional-- though it is interesting to review the database every now and again and look at the various densities of literary activity. I think it natural that as the magazine ages, we receive more submissions and subscriptions from people outside of Manhattan and Brooklyn. We've seen a large increase in submissions and
subscriptions from people on the west coast-- cultural diffusion in practice(?)-- we're huge in Bend, OR (j/k)
Steven A. Dolgin - The MacGuffin:
We consider the journal to be national, not because of the print run or distribution per se. Nonetheless we receive work from across the U.S. regularly and have had submissions from Europe from time to time as well.
Dinty W. Moore – Brevity:
We have a growing international audience. Over 2,000 people have signed up to receive notices when a new issue is put up on the web, and though the vast majority of these people seem to be U.S.-based, I can tell from the e-mail address extensions that our presence in Europe, Asia and elsewhere is growing. We also get an increasing number of international submissions. Being e-mail based makes it just as easy for someone from Japan to submit as someone from Duluth -- that's one advantage.
Dan:
With so much technology available these days, do you believe a staff member needs to live in the area the journal is published from? Or is it possible to be productive and live elsewhere, maybe visiting once or twice per issue?
Eli Horowitz - McSweeneys:
It depends on how you set up your system, whether you accept electronic submissions, etc, but in general I think the geography can be very flexible.
Thom Didato - Failbetter:
My colleagues and I get almost all the work done via email and phone -- though it is far more enjoyable to have editorial meetings at the local bar (just not as productive).
Ravi Shankar - Drunken Boat:
Our staff is dispersed around the world, which makes it difficult to coordinate things, not technology-wise but people-wise. It’s hard to manage someone on the other coast. The benefit is that we have potential new sources of ideas and energies. We’re always looking for people to help out.
Steve Erickson - Black Clock
It’s certainly possible to accomplish everything in the cybervillage, particularly in the case of a magazine like Black Clock that’s published semi-annually. Black Clock has been printed in Vancouver and Iceland, and not one of us ever made a visit. Having said that, everyone on the staff of Black Clock, including me and the Art Director and the two Senior Editors and the five or six assistant and copy editors, all live within an hour’s drive of each other, and it means we can all sit down eyeball to eyeball with each other even if it’s only three or four times a year.
Bradford Morrow - Conjunctions:
Our staff is all over the map. And we have extremely close and productive relationships even though some of us have never actually met. I have worked with our copyeditor, Pat Sims, whom I think of as a sister, for over eleven years now—and we’ve never laid eyes on each other. Similarly, our typesetter for the past fifteen years, I’ve only met once. Our editorial office is in New York, and our business office is on the campus of Bard College, which is our publisher. Those offices are in touch every day, of course, but our managing editor, Michael Bergstein, and I only see each other once a week or so.
Charles Valle - Fence:
It's certainly possible to have editors geographically dispersed; Rebecca taught in Idaho this past winter and communication, for the most part, was not a problem. At my day job, the people in power have definitely taken to many consultants' advice of moving towards a paperless workflow. They tell me it's the future.
Steven A. Dolgin - The MacGuffin:
It is convenient and most productive when we meet in person, yet our finest proofreader moved about 100 miles away and for many years has been able to carry out her activities superbly.
Dinty W. Moore – Brevity:
This is a no-brainer for us, since all of our submissions come in by e-mail, and the journal is entirely web-based. My outside readers and interns are spread all over the country, and in fact, one of them lives in Italy. We do it all electronically. I imagine the equation would be much more difficult for a paper-and-ink based journal.
Dan:
Does the journal solicit stories/essays? If so, have you ever had to kick back a story or an essay for editorial reasons? If so, how difficult is that to do?
Eli Horowitz - McSweeneys:
We rarely solicit any stories, partly for that reason. In general, I find that solicited stories are often not as strong as the ones that emerge naturally, and then, yeah, there's the sense of obligation. It's a balance, but I prefer to take what comes and enjoy the surprise.
Thom Didato - Failbetter:
Funny you should ask...failbetter just published its fifth anniversary issue, and for the first time we went back to our alumni and solicited new work. And though we did not use/publish all the work submitted, everyone was completely cool with the process.
Of course, when we were first starting out, we did indeed solicit work and sometimes there were occasions when the solicited work was not up to par. Yes, there were some sticky situations and offended egos, but in the end it all worked out. Thankfully, we avoid such potential problems now because we do not have to rely upon soliciting as our means to get good material.
Ravi Shankar - Drunken Boat:
We solicit work from authors/artists we admire. Usually if there’s something that doesn’t work for us, we don’t mind articulating it to even a solicited contributor. There’s a critical function to be played by the curatorial aspects of editing a magazine, and we don’t mind providing our ideas. Sometimes this has led to very generative dialogue and revised work that works.
Steve Erickson - Black Clock
(Ed: See next response as Steve Erickson has combined the two questions for his response)
Bradford Morrow - Conjunctions:
Often we’ll make invitations to contribute to a theme issue. As your question hints, it can be a tricky situation if someone comes in with a piece that simply doesn’t work out. It’s rare, fortunately, but it happens. It’s awkward and difficult, but my concern is always to make the issue the best possible. So when it happens, I make the call. It generally turns out not to be as cataclysmic as one imagines.
Charles Valle - Fence:
We have solicited work in the past. To my knowledge, we have not had to kick back solicited work during my tenure. (see our Summer issue for Joe Wenderoth's experience)
Steven A. Dolgin - The MacGuffin:
We read stories, non-fiction essays and so forth. Sometimes page considerations force us to return the material. We take no pleasure in this and simply hope that the writer will submit again.
Dinty W. Moore – Brevity:
We don't solicit anymore, because we are overwhelmed with high quality submissions as it is. I truly hate having to say "no thank you" to a writer I know, a writer I admire, or someone we have published before, but it happens all the time, and the authors seem universally forgiving and understanding.
Dan:
Does the journal actively search the slush pile to look for new writers? Does the journal consider it a priority to discover newcomers to the world of being published? What sort of percentage of stories, essays and/or poems published come from previously unpublished writers?
Eli Horowitz - McSweeneys:
We don't have a traditional slush pile; most of our submissions go straight to the same big rack, and that's where a lot of what we publish comes from. I think it is definitely a priority, and even an obligation, to stay open to whatever comes in. We almost always have some first-timers in each issue, but I don't think the real distinction is published vs unpublished; that has a lot to do with how widely the writer has submitted his or her work. But we do definitely have a commitment to finding new voices.
Thom Didato - Failbetter:
failbetter has a great track record when it comes to publishing first-time writers -- about 1 per issue. And in terms of the "slush," more than half of the works in any issue come from that beloved (yet at times, dreadful) pile.
Ravi Shankar - Drunken Boat:
I’d say roughly ten percent of each issue is composed of authors previously published and about seventy-five percent comes from unsolicited work that we’ve discovered (often from well-published authors, but sometimes not).
Steve Erickson - Black Clock
I’m answering all of these questions together, if I might, since the response involves what’s a still evolving “policy” (if that’s even the word) on our part. So far we’ve published only stories that I’ve solicited myself. There’s been a certain amount of controversy and disgruntlement about this outside, but there’s nothing mysterious or elitist about it, it’s pretty simple: first and foremost it’s just a matter of manpower and not having the bodies to read the hundreds of submissions that are going to come in once we open that particular floodgate. Even without inviting them we’ve gotten submissions. Second, when we were getting Black Clock off the ground, I had a certain idea — however inarticulate — of what I thought the magazine should be. The most pressing concern for any new magazine is to establish an editorial identity, and if I have one single responsibility as editor of the magazine, that’s it. Having said that, a magazine can also get too rigid about its “identity,” to the point that its editorial decisions become more about its image than about its contents. I take what I realize may seem a peculiar position that I, personally, don’t have to love every single thing in the magazine. I do have to believe some intelligent reader out there somewhere is going to love it. But beyond inviting to the magazine the sort of writer I think we should be publishing, I also understand that the only advantage for a DeLillo or Lethem or Scott or Wallace or Joseph McElroy to write for us is that he or she is allowed the freedom of his or her creative idiosyncrasies, which is to say the freedom to try out things that maybe he can’t try out elsewhere. So that pretty much precludes the possibility of me rejecting what the writer does. I may, on occasion, go back and suggest that what he’s trying to do might work better if the ending is recast, say, or a particular paragraph is cut — I’ve done that but I always do it with the understanding that in the end the writer has the final say. I suppose that’s because I’m a writer and I’ve written for a lot of magazines myself and I’m predisposed to treating other writers the way I would want to have been treated. So the upshot is that in terms of editorial content, the magazine is a collaboration between me and the writers, between the decisions I make and what the writers who contribute wind up doing. As far as new writers are concerned, at the moment we’re about to go to press with our fourth issue and I’m putting together our fifth issue and with each issue since the first we’ve been bringing in more and more people who haven’t published much or have never been published at all, and with each new issue the ratio of known writers to unknown writers shifts that much more perceptibly, and will continue shifting, in favor of the many really good writers out there who have nowhere to go. The sixth issue will be all poetry. We have a great poetry editor, Arielle Greenberg, who’s written several remarkable volumes of poetry and whose own work in particular and whose sense of poetry in general is really original — she’ll be very involved in putting together that issue. After number six we’re going to begin taking submissions and hope that an increased staff can handle the deluge.
Bradford Morrow - Conjunctions:
Yes, actively. A remarkable number of contributions to our upcoming fall issue, Secret Lives of Children, have come from the unsolicited manuscripts pile. I don’t know the percentage of previously unpublished writers, but looking at the Notes on Contributors in the current issue, I see that four of the writers included don’t have a first book published yet. And the issue before that, Beyond Arcadia, featured the work of twelve emerging poets as chosen by twelve established poets. We very actively publish new voices in our online journal, Web Conjunctions, as well. It’s at www.conjunctions.com .
Charles Valle - Fence:
I would say that Fence considers it important to publish new writers. I wouldn't say that Fence designates a certain percentage of its pages for "New" writers. As with all writers (unpublished or not) looking to submit their work, I would suggest that s/he read the journal before submitting blindly.
Steven A. Dolgin - The MacGuffin:
I don't have a list handy, but if one were to check the biographical notes in any issue, it would be apparent that many writers have already published books or go on to publish books and individual pieces in other fine journals. Still, there are many who have published little, yet we are fortunate enough to receive a jewel from them and we often find their work begins to appear elsewhere and we are pleased when they drop us a line of thanks for giving them a start.
Dinty W. Moore – Brevity:
I love newcomers, and that is certainly part of our mission. Though I don't keep any firm numbers, I would easily guess that a third of our published essays are from writers who have published just a little or not at all prior to being in BREVITY. We get a lot of submissions from graduate students, and many of them are excellent.
Dan:
Does it help an author at all to have an agent when it comes to publishing in your journal?
Eli Horowitz - McSweeneys:
Well, I guess they don't have to pay for their own postage. But otherwise, nope, not really.
Thom Didato - Failbetter:
Not in the least (and we do get agent queries from time to time). In truth, we're usually turned off by that approach. Better to simply submit the story yourself and let the work speak for itself.
Ravi Shankar - Drunken Boat:
Not unless the agent is going to benefit some aspect of our correspondence.
Steve Erickson - Black Clock
No.
Bradford Morrow - Conjunctions:
If I understand the question—does an author who’s represented by an agent stand a better chance of having her or his work accepted in Conjunctions—the answer would be no. Many agents are great to work with, and they can be facilitating and helpful. But a piece that comes in represented by an agent isn’t considered for publication any more or less seriously than other manuscripts.
Charles Valle - Fence:
Not so much. All of the submissions we receive go into the designated editors' boxes. Meaning: we do not treat agented pieces differently.
Steven A. Dolgin - The MacGuffin:
No. The cover letters indicate tremendous credentials most of the time, yet we are careful to read all submissions and let the work stand on its own merit.
Dinty W. Moore – Brevity:
Oh, goodness no.
Dan:
How does your journal pay those who are published? In copies? In cash? By page? Or simply with the privilege of being published?
Eli Horowitz - McSweeneys:
They get a check (a flat rate for everyone, unless the story is very very short) and a few copies of the issue. And our everlasting thanks. And maybe some free postcards, if I'm feeling generous.
Thom Didato - Failbetter:
Presently, failbetter offers no remuneration -- but I must say that really hasn't been an issue (for us or our writers). With over 30,000 readers, we believe we offer something far more valuable than a $100 stipend from the traditional print literary journal with a much smaller circulation -- and that is publicity. Indeed, when we publish say a chapter of an author's forthcoming novel and then provide a direct link to buy the given book, the writer gets far more out of those book sales than they would by the token stipend. And ask your previously unpublished and/or up-and-coming author if they would want $50 for their given story, or a chance to be published in a widely-read issue that features interviews with the likes of Chabon, Russo or some other larger literary name -- again, we figure they'll get far more out of the failbetter association in the long run.
Ravi Shankar – Drunken Boat:
We pay in exposure and in being grouped with artists who’d never normally share a space. We also invite our contributors to join in on our performances and events.
Steve Erickson - Black Clock
Uh, “pay” is probably altogether too exotic a word. We give our contributors a small financial token of our appreciation, let’s put it that way, that’s somewhere between more than what a lot of literary journals pay and not nearly what the writers deserve. Just as a matter of principle I’ve felt from the beginning like we ought to pay something. After printing costs and the like, we see what we have left and what we can afford to divide up, while also taking into account that maybe one writer gave us five hundred words and another gave us five thousand — in any event it might buy a decent dinner out for about one and a half people. Contributors also get a couple copies of the magazine. Of course it’s also understood that, as with most magazines, the writer retains full ownership of the piece after we publish it and can then do with it whatever he or she wants.
Bradford Morrow - Conjunctions:
We pay contributors an honorarium and also give them copies of the issue they’re in.
Charles Valle - Fence:
Fence pays in contributor copies along with a year subscription. We try to pay contributors as our budget will allow. Some grants have certain conditions (ie. 40% of $xxx will go to contributor payments) which help us budget author payments. [a big shout out to the Jerome Foundation]
Steven A. Dolgin - The MacGuffin:
We pay in copies.
Dinty W. Moore – Brevity:
We haven't paid in the past, but will begin paying a small honorarium with the next issue, in the range of $20. Since we are web-based, there are no free issues to give out.
Dan:
Does your journal accept electronic submissions?
Eli Horowitz - McSweeneys:
Yup.
Thom Didato - Failbetter:
Well...of course. In fact, we're about to install a new online submissions database which will allow the writer to check on exactly where his/her submission is in the editorial process. That said, we still get the old snail mail submissions (mostly bad poetry written on cocktail napkins).
Ravi Shankar - Drunken Boat:
Yes – but we don’t use the medium as an excuse for overkill.
Bradford Morrow - Conjunctions:
No.
Charles Valle - Fence:
We do not presently accept electronic submissions.
Steven A. Dolgin - The MacGuffin:
Yes.
Dinty W. Moore – Brevity:
Exclusively.
Dan:
How about simultaneous submissions? Do you feel it’s fair for an author to have a story out there for up to six months with a journal without submitting it to others at the same time?
Eli Horowitz - McSweeneys:
We do accept simultaneous, for just that reason. We have problems staying organized and up-to-date with submissions, which I feel bad about, but meanwhile I don't want to be interfering with someone's chances of getting published elsewhere. If we want to have first crack, we've just got to get on it faster.
Thom Didato - Failbetter:
So long as the author immediately informs us if the given story has been accepted elsewhere, we're completely fine with simultaneous submissions. As we used to say in our guidelines: "Simultaneous submissions are acceptable, if not understandable."
Ravi Shankar – Drunken Boat:
We say submit as widely and brazenly as possible. Just let us know if a work has been accepted elsewhere.
Steve Erickson - Black Clock
Of course it’s not fair. The whole business about “simultaneous submissions” was invented by publishers to rig the game in their favor. Jesus, it’s hard enough being a writer in this life. I fully understand that until I accept a piece from a writer, he or she may pursue any and all other avenues, and as many of our writers can tell you, there have been times when I’ve “accepted” a piece that wasn’t going to be published for a year or so with the understanding that the writer was free to submit elsewhere if he or she wanted and to just let me know if they found another venue.
Bradford Morrow - Conjunctions:
I hate simultaneous submissions and we never take six months to make up our minds about submitted work. Simultaneous submissions can so often cause problems, especially when we go through the process of reading through a manuscript, deciding to accept it, then contacting the writer only to find it’s been taken elsewhere. The practice foments chaos. It would be far better, if the writer’s in a hurry to have a decision, to give guidance in the cover letter. Something like, I’m offering this to your journal for consideration but need to have an answer in X number of weeks, or whatever. Being a writer, I know both sides of this particular fence. It’s no more fair of a simultaneous submittor to be impatient for quick results than it is for a literary journal to be dragging and lagging with manuscripts people have sent them. There needs to be a civilized balance.
Charles Valle - Fence:
It's part of the game. We accept simultaneous submissions with the understanding that the writer will notify us when/if their piece gets accepted elsewhere. I understand why certain journals do not accept simultaneous submissions; we've had situations where we accept a piece only to find out that another journal published the piece months before us. It's frustrating, but, again, part of the game. All of our editors work other jobs--we're all super busy-- and sometimes it's difficult to give a response in a timely manner. So, yes, we're fine with simultaneous submissions.
Steven A. Dolgin - The MacGuffin:
We do accept simultaneous submissions for the reason you state--the turn around time can be rather long.
Dinty W. Moore – Brevity:
We tend to respond within four to six weeks, not months, but still and all, I am fine with simultaneous submissions. I think it is just stupid for a writer to scattershot submissions here, there, and everywhere, but to send a piece out to three or four carefully-selected journals at a time seems reasonable.
Dan:
How important do you consider your internet presence? Does your website allow for the reading of select stories from the current issue? How about past issues?
Eli Horowitz - McSweeneys:
It's a pretty big help, I think. For many people, that's their first entry to the McSweeneys world. Not all make the leap to the print journal, but some do. And it provides a more direct link to our readers, and gives us a way to announce new books.
Thom Didato - Failbetter:
Again, with failbetter, it's all there (current and past issues) -- and always will be.
Ravi Shankar - Drunken Boat:
Crucial since we're exclusively online. Our archives are online also.
Steve Erickson - Black Clock
I think an internet presence is hugely important, which is one of the reasons I’m doing this interview. As with the matter of submissions, it’s reflective of our limited manpower that our web site still isn’t what any of us wants it to be. If it wasn’t the highest of priorities for the first couple of years, it’s quickly becoming one. I don’t know that we’ll ever have whole issues up online and I’m not sure I even want that, because we’re not an online magazine, we’re the old-fashioned kind that you have to hold in your hands, and I like the quaint custom of having to actually turn pages. But we would like to get to the point where at the very least there’s a selection of work online that gives people a better idea of what we’re about. Our web site, by the way, is www.blackclock.org.
Bradford Morrow - Conjunctions:
Really important to us. We’ve had over 200,000 visitors since launching our website and I’ve noticed that we’ve been receiving a lot more manuscripts from farflung parts the world in part as a result. There are hundreds of selections available to read from past issues, which are catalogued all the way back to the first issue. As I mentioned, we also publish online a stream of new work that goes up every couple of weeks or so. We have a page in the site called the Audio Vault, where you can listen to contributors give readings. There’s a Previews page, also, where one can learn about the theme of upcoming issues. Just Out gives a complete table of contents of the current issue, with some sample works. It’s a lively site
Charles Valle - Fence:
Important, bordering on Very Important. We post selections from the current issue as well as archives of selections from past issues.
Steven A. Dolgin - The MacGuffin:
Not yet, but we are moving in that direction and hope to have that capability within the year.
Dinty W. Moore – Brevity:
We are all about our Internet presence, since that is all we have. All of our published work, and all past issues, are available to anyone, at no cost.
Dan:
What is the purpose of Literary Journals having annual editor’s awards? Simply for recognition for the authors, or is there something else?
Eli Horowitz - McSweeneys:
We don't do this. Actually, I'm not sure what this is -- our favorite story of the year? I guess that could be nice for the winner.
Thom Didato - Failbetter:
Hmmm...failbetter does not have any annual editorial awards or writer contests. That said, we do nominate (and have received recognition for) works published in failbetter for such awards as the Pushcart Anthology, Best American Poetry, and the best of the internet awards/collections presented by StorySouth and Carve Magazine.
Ravi Shankar – Drunken Boat:
I have a tripartite response to that: it’s for cementing an aesthetic sensibility, to delineate what kinds of work the journal is looking for; it’s to celebrate the artists in question, introducing them to new audiences; and it’s to help fund the journal so that it can continue to publish.
Steve Erickson - Black Clock
I have no idea. Speaking personally, as someone who’s won a few awards and lost a lot more, I think awards are compromised by their very nature — a consensus of everyone’s second choice and no one’s first.
Bradford Morrow - Conjunctions:
We’ve never gotten involved with them, so I don’t know. I think I have shied away from annual editor’s awards because I like all the work we’ve chosen for a given issue, and to then sort out which of them is even better than the pieces we loved enough to publish in the first place seems, I don’t know, like overhierarchization. I’m sure they have a positive impact in various ways; it’s just not for us.
Charles Valle - Fence:
Fence does not have an Annual Editor's Award.
Steven A. Dolgin - The MacGuffin:
We run one competition yearly--"Poet Hunt" with $500, $250 and $100 awards. The competition is typically judged by a writer of national prominence.
Dinty W. Moore – Brevity:
We don’t have awards.
Dan:
If you could get one simple message out to potential readers of your journal, what would it be?
Eli Horowitz - McSweeneys:
I doubt that carbs are so awful as you hear these days.
Thom Didato - Failbetter:
Though the medium is different, a writer's approach to an online journal should be the same. Read the submission guidelines. Get to know the journal. With it all being there online for anyone to access, a writer has no excuse not to do these things. Now in terms of failbetter specifically, I think our one bit of philosophical advice for writers goes like this: "We seek that which is at once original and personal. When choosing work to submit, be certain that what you have created could only have come from you."
My parting message to potential readers: "failbetter - you're just one click away." Seriously, click here (http://www.failbetter.com)
Ravi Shankar - Drunken Boat:
The world of publishing is undergoing a vast sea-change, the ramifications of which might not even be fully felt in our lifetime. The internet is to the printing press what the printing press was to scrolls and we’re charged by the possibilities of communities and creations online. We’re interested in works of art that use the medium of the web as part of their conception, constitution, and reception, or interactivity, in the deepest sense. As one of the most tenured online publications, we urge you to support the arts online, with ideas, funding, and collaborations.
Steve Erickson - Black Clock
Well, the magazine is its own message, and in a time when literature’s very survivability calls for some sort of guerrilla action, I would hope we’re a part of that.
Bradford Morrow - Conjunctions:
Next fall, in 2006, we will be publishing our 25th Anniversary issue. Since the journal and its many contributors—a couple of thousand of them—speak for themselves, my message would simply be to give Conjunctions a read if you don’t know the project already. A one-year subscription is only $18 for two issues, which are each around 400 pages of new writing. Or get one from the bookstore, or from the library. Just the main thing would be to sit down with an issue and read it. I believe in the writers we publish and want nothing more than for them to be read.
Charles Valle – Fence:
Respect the community:
-Read the journal before you submit.
-Be patient with the editors.
-Support-- subscribe, attend readings, donate.
Steven A. Dolgin - The MacGuffin:
Give us a try. I am certain you will find some of the finest contemporary writing in The MacGuffin.
Dinty W. Moore – Brevity:
Thanks for caring.
Dan:
Thanks again for your participation in this. I hope it brings some more readers your way!
Thom Didato - Failbetter:
Thank you!
Bradford Morrow - Conjunctions:
Thanks, Dan, for bringing Conjunctions and other journals to your readers.
Charles Valle - Fence:
Thanx!
Steven A. Dolgin - The MacGuffin:
Thank you.
Comments