I often do like half 'this fits the vibe' subs and half 'throw a curve ball' subs. I never bother with stats. The whole thing for me is basically a random numbers game. As a reader I like being surprised and am not always on the lookout for work that 'fits' my taste. Tastes can change, grow, evolve. Litmags aren't static entities, not are writers (hopefully). The whole game is a carnival of moving targets and shifting landscapes and every now and then you hot the bullseye, most often not. Thanks for playing. My life will not change if I get 0.5 more acceptances than last year. I'm happy if a poem finds a journal that is happy to publish it. It's a nice feeling, but best savored IMHO without too much analysis or obsession. This feels too much like online dating at times. We're at the brutal mercy of metrics, the exact opposite of art.
Thanks Mark for starting this thoughtful conversation. Like collecting art, I write about what moves me and to express myself, follow submission calls on Instagram and Duotrobe and keep track of journals I submit what to in order to refine my sense of fit between me as a writer and prospective editors (hopefully starting a relationship) and tend not to deal with those with extra long response windows or emails that show no consideration for the writers submitting to them. In other words all rejection letters are not equal either.
I'm glad you shared these thoughts. My strategy is a bit wonky. I don't, every month, try to hit a number regarding submissions. I find I'm a slow submitter. I don't do well on themed submissions because I find it hard to write something to a deadline for someone else's idea. It feels forced and it stresses me out. Usually I submit to themes only if I already have something that fits. There are certain lit mags I love but I don't submit, because I know I don't have the things they are looking for. So, usually I don't have a gameplan. I read what's available and say, Oh, I have some things that fit. Therefore, when I do submit, it's usually positive. But, I am also a slow writer. It usually takes me a couple of weeks or a month or longer per piece. I like to sit and live with them for awhile. Let them change and grow. Although I do have several pieces in the works at once. I do subscribe to paying it forward. Since I'm always scanning I pass along to fellow writers if I see something I think they have pieces for. Why not?
Sara, I think it's worth noting the positives of taking a slow approach and you bring attention to ways in which you do so here in a number of ways.
Having a gameplan is not 100% necessarily. An exception, I'd suggest, is tiered submissions. Start with your top targets (I know you know this).
On writing to themes... I generally agree. Themes are a tough one. I'd not against them by any means. Writing to the theme is a good exercise though I'd put this in the category of writing persona, "after" poems, workshop exercises, that sometimes, I think, need to go through additional iterations to transform into something that is more personal and, in turn, publishable.
Wow, Mark that's quite some gamification and thanks for doing all that work. Over the last year, I sent one non-fiction story to five pubs. One picked it up after eight months. It should be out next month. One that rejected it just accepted a book review from my better half in less than two months. It will also be out next month. Go figure. Merilyn
Ooh, I have spent entirely too much time thinking about this.
From the editor side, I know we all wish authors collectively would be more mindful about what they send, but I have a bone to pick with quoting 90% for a “perfect fit.” For four issues now, I’ve read every poem sent to Variant Lit (62 Duotrope reports’ worth in the last year), and though yes, I suspect we get many submissions from people who have never read the magazine, we not only don’t take 90% of the rest, we don’t even take 90% of our (internal) final round, and any of the latter would fit right in. (For reference, Variant is tied for 262nd on Brecht De Poortere’s list, on the strength of one Best of the Net winner—hardly on the cursus honorum of prestigious credits.)
From the author side, Duotrope says I’ve sent 88 packets and had an acceptance percentage of 11.3 (counting withdrawals as rejections for reasons mysterious to me). Of my 9 accepted poems, 5 were never rejected, so I think I’m doing OK at matching (when I’m not immersing myself in the Paris Review’s slush, anyway). But for those 5, where I felt very good about my chances, there have been many more times I’ve felt equally good and had my work rejected, and the more care I take, the more it hurts. Even if the flingers are drawing dead with 90% of their packets, I’m not sure that—from a narrowly tactical point of view—they’re wrong.
Then there’s the question of whether the “perfect fit” even exists for many of the pieces I write. I just about fell out of my chair this morning when I saw a paid theme call that perfectly matches my favorite unpublished sonnet; this is very much the exception. Chill Subs’s recommendation service has been only moderately helpful.
Allow me to acknowledge the classic "75% of all statistics are made up" jest... this to say that the 90% remark is completely unscientific.
I appreciate the internal perspective. Speaking of bones to pick, I don't love statistical analysis of lit mags quality/caliber based on BotN/Pushcart/Best American inclusion. I find it frustrating... of course, I might not be as grumbly about this if ONE ART was leading the pack though I'd like to think I would still believe this is a fairly bs way to determine the lit mags that are most essential or most well-liked or most-read ... because the metrics don't say anything about that.
Yeah, I have complicated feelings about prizes and (by proxy) rankings, even having taken on the role of canvassing my fellow editors for what they want to nominate; that was shorthand for the rough caliber of a magazine I cannot be objective about.
For my own purposes, I’ll read an issue like I would a packet and use my editorial judgment. I try to aim high enough that I’m not worried about having a piece published before it’s ready.
great insightful information - thanks for sharing. targeting the "right" poetry journal is key and in the end it is always a numbers game - you may or may not be accepted depending on many factors not known to the poet - but - and this is important - take a deep breath and keep on submitting (get feedback and revise, too!)
I often do like half 'this fits the vibe' subs and half 'throw a curve ball' subs. I never bother with stats. The whole thing for me is basically a random numbers game. As a reader I like being surprised and am not always on the lookout for work that 'fits' my taste. Tastes can change, grow, evolve. Litmags aren't static entities, not are writers (hopefully). The whole game is a carnival of moving targets and shifting landscapes and every now and then you hot the bullseye, most often not. Thanks for playing. My life will not change if I get 0.5 more acceptances than last year. I'm happy if a poem finds a journal that is happy to publish it. It's a nice feeling, but best savored IMHO without too much analysis or obsession. This feels too much like online dating at times. We're at the brutal mercy of metrics, the exact opposite of art.
I love "A Carnival of Moving Targets and Shifting Landscapes"
Good comp to online dating
I've never actually tried online dating, but it seemed apt!
Ha, well, count yourself lucky. Many can attest to this :P
Thanks Mark for starting this thoughtful conversation. Like collecting art, I write about what moves me and to express myself, follow submission calls on Instagram and Duotrobe and keep track of journals I submit what to in order to refine my sense of fit between me as a writer and prospective editors (hopefully starting a relationship) and tend not to deal with those with extra long response windows or emails that show no consideration for the writers submitting to them. In other words all rejection letters are not equal either.
I'm glad you shared these thoughts. My strategy is a bit wonky. I don't, every month, try to hit a number regarding submissions. I find I'm a slow submitter. I don't do well on themed submissions because I find it hard to write something to a deadline for someone else's idea. It feels forced and it stresses me out. Usually I submit to themes only if I already have something that fits. There are certain lit mags I love but I don't submit, because I know I don't have the things they are looking for. So, usually I don't have a gameplan. I read what's available and say, Oh, I have some things that fit. Therefore, when I do submit, it's usually positive. But, I am also a slow writer. It usually takes me a couple of weeks or a month or longer per piece. I like to sit and live with them for awhile. Let them change and grow. Although I do have several pieces in the works at once. I do subscribe to paying it forward. Since I'm always scanning I pass along to fellow writers if I see something I think they have pieces for. Why not?
Sara, I think it's worth noting the positives of taking a slow approach and you bring attention to ways in which you do so here in a number of ways.
Having a gameplan is not 100% necessarily. An exception, I'd suggest, is tiered submissions. Start with your top targets (I know you know this).
On writing to themes... I generally agree. Themes are a tough one. I'd not against them by any means. Writing to the theme is a good exercise though I'd put this in the category of writing persona, "after" poems, workshop exercises, that sometimes, I think, need to go through additional iterations to transform into something that is more personal and, in turn, publishable.
Wow, Mark that's quite some gamification and thanks for doing all that work. Over the last year, I sent one non-fiction story to five pubs. One picked it up after eight months. It should be out next month. One that rejected it just accepted a book review from my better half in less than two months. It will also be out next month. Go figure. Merilyn
Thank you for this very useful, inciteful information, Mark.
Ooh, I have spent entirely too much time thinking about this.
From the editor side, I know we all wish authors collectively would be more mindful about what they send, but I have a bone to pick with quoting 90% for a “perfect fit.” For four issues now, I’ve read every poem sent to Variant Lit (62 Duotrope reports’ worth in the last year), and though yes, I suspect we get many submissions from people who have never read the magazine, we not only don’t take 90% of the rest, we don’t even take 90% of our (internal) final round, and any of the latter would fit right in. (For reference, Variant is tied for 262nd on Brecht De Poortere’s list, on the strength of one Best of the Net winner—hardly on the cursus honorum of prestigious credits.)
From the author side, Duotrope says I’ve sent 88 packets and had an acceptance percentage of 11.3 (counting withdrawals as rejections for reasons mysterious to me). Of my 9 accepted poems, 5 were never rejected, so I think I’m doing OK at matching (when I’m not immersing myself in the Paris Review’s slush, anyway). But for those 5, where I felt very good about my chances, there have been many more times I’ve felt equally good and had my work rejected, and the more care I take, the more it hurts. Even if the flingers are drawing dead with 90% of their packets, I’m not sure that—from a narrowly tactical point of view—they’re wrong.
Then there’s the question of whether the “perfect fit” even exists for many of the pieces I write. I just about fell out of my chair this morning when I saw a paid theme call that perfectly matches my favorite unpublished sonnet; this is very much the exception. Chill Subs’s recommendation service has been only moderately helpful.
Thanks for weighing in.
Allow me to acknowledge the classic "75% of all statistics are made up" jest... this to say that the 90% remark is completely unscientific.
I appreciate the internal perspective. Speaking of bones to pick, I don't love statistical analysis of lit mags quality/caliber based on BotN/Pushcart/Best American inclusion. I find it frustrating... of course, I might not be as grumbly about this if ONE ART was leading the pack though I'd like to think I would still believe this is a fairly bs way to determine the lit mags that are most essential or most well-liked or most-read ... because the metrics don't say anything about that.
Yeah, I have complicated feelings about prizes and (by proxy) rankings, even having taken on the role of canvassing my fellow editors for what they want to nominate; that was shorthand for the rough caliber of a magazine I cannot be objective about.
For my own purposes, I’ll read an issue like I would a packet and use my editorial judgment. I try to aim high enough that I’m not worried about having a piece published before it’s ready.
A heartening and useful essay. I will be sharing essay with my workshops.
Thank you!
Thank you!
great insightful information - thanks for sharing. targeting the "right" poetry journal is key and in the end it is always a numbers game - you may or may not be accepted depending on many factors not known to the poet - but - and this is important - take a deep breath and keep on submitting (get feedback and revise, too!)