Comments on: Po-rruption?

By: Quincy Lehr

Quincy Lehr — Sat, 01 Dec 2007 13:18:04 +0000

Interesting post, though I think it’s noteworthy that Foetry focussed on the contests without asking the essential questions about the contests as such: yes, there is favouritism; there are inside candidates quite often, etc., but… does asking people to shell out money to be considered for publication, and thereby subsidising a press, change things? Well, of course it does.

From a press’s point of view, the talented unknown–who may have submitted the best manuscript–is not necessarily a good investment, since no one knows who he or she is. Likewise, though, the “inside” person is probably going to be quite good by the standards of the judges. Of course, if you know that Jane Insider or Bob Club-Tie III is in the contest and probably going to win, you’ll probably spend the $25 entry fee on a nice steak dinner or something.

And I think that’s the key. If I e-mail off a submission to The Barefoot Muse, I do so in relative ignorance of what you’ve already accepted or rejected. It also doesn’t cost me anything, and a paper submission pretty much runs the most of the stamps.

As for the manuscript contests, I don’t think they make much sense from a publisher’s point of view, save financially (and in the U.S., where there isn’t Arts Council money of the sort that subsidises poetry publication in Britain and Ireland). The contests claim to offer the writer a potential shortcut, but they don’t really. Better to take the entry fees out of the equation, find some rich dude looking for a tax write-off, and take it from there.

Quincy

By: KateBB

KateBB — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 15:15:05 +0000

Blacklisted, really? I can’t even imagine a situation in which, as an editor, I would blacklist someone just because she said no to one of my submissions, especially when it was done with a personal note. To my mind, it’s better to be rejected by an editor you know than accepted for the wrong reasons. Still, it’s a sticky wicket. More than once I’ve wondered if I’ve killed my chances somewhere by rejecting the poetry of a poetry editor!

I will admit that I might read with a jaundiced eye the work of a submitter who has dissed me in the past, though. Screamed at me, complained about me, publicly defamed my work. “Prior negative relationships” do happen. In such rare cases, if the work seems decent and germane, I call in one of my co-eds for a second opinion.

Now that I’ve been at this for a while, I can faithfully report that a gracious note from a rejectee makes me happy and reflects well on the poet too.

By: Dave Bonta

Dave Bonta — Tue, 27 Nov 2007 16:16:43 +0000

Thanks for sharing your views on this. I try hard to get our guest editors at the online lit mag I curate to adopt a similar attitude. Basically, if you’re serious about being a writer, you have to learn how to suck it up. And editors should be willing to reject works by Nobel laureates if they suck and accept works by unpublished nobodies if they rock. That is simply The Way It Should Be.

By: Julie Carter

Julie Carter — Mon, 26 Nov 2007 18:05:20 +0000

My one experience with poetry editing was in a blind-reading scenario, and I was so much more comfortable with that. I know I’m not objective. I think some people are much, much better at putting aside their own feelings about a poet in order to read the poetry than I am.

If you ever did want to do blind reading, you should recruit someone simply to do the work of stripping the identifiers out. Put those gawkers to work! (And now I scramble away lest I get recruited. )

Julie

By: Rachel

Rachel — Mon, 26 Nov 2007 14:15:04 +0000

Yay! Good entry – and of course you know I support your decision to reject those you did. I’m sorry you’ve felt any negative ripples from that. Sigh.

By: DavidM

DavidM — Sun, 25 Nov 2007 21:09:47 +0000

“Which leads me to anti-nepotism, a much nastier beast in my opinion. This is the “I scratch your back; you scratch mine” school of poetry publication–the one which leads people to become editors of journals simply so they can trade favors and get poems published which do not deserve it. I know that I have been blacklisted by at least two editors simply because I have–on merit–rejected their poems …”

What a bunch of amateurs (in the most negative sense of that word) they are. They’re not worth knowing nor worrying about. They probably edit journals that do not pay in terms of money nor prestige. So, forget about them.

By: Nic Sebastian

Nic Sebastian — Sun, 25 Nov 2007 04:24:45 +0000

Fascinating read on a difficult issue, even for a non-editor-wannabe-poet. Thanks.

By: Po-rruption? « Very Like A Whale

Po-rruption? « Very Like A Whale — Sun, 25 Nov 2007 04:19:43 +0000

[...] November 25, 2007 at 4:19 am (response to criticism) Barefoot Muse editor Anna Evans blogs about the difficults attendant on rejecting submissions from poets one knows. More for the response to criticism tag. [...]