Submittable tone-policing; Litro's blockchain initiative; lit mags using AI art; advice for writers; Kenyon Review & the CIA; "the New Yorker story;" literary "it girls;" markets + more...
Rie, as a personal favor to you, please give me your email and I will flood your inbox with fake rejection notes that we can both laugh about in our memoirs. (big smile)
Yes, hilarious. I hope that now the Submittable "purity police squad" will get more active policing the fake contests and other platform manipulation that has been permitted.
Examples of "platform manipulation" - - - - Submittable permits numerous lit-mags to appear on its first page, posing as "last chance opps" with hours left before they close - - when in reality, the same lit-mags will occupy that identical position on the next day, the day after that, etc. . . . . . . . . . A 2nd example: Submittable permits fee-based contests to appear, year after year, when NO BOOKS have been chosen for a few years in a row. Why isn't this abuse policed better after they get complaints??? . . . . . . . . . . A 3rd example: Submittable permits various lit-mags to solicit writers who previously submitted; the email says that they did not receive "enough submissions" for the upcoming issue and why don't you send in something soon? When you get there, you will see there is a $$ sub fee! In other words, it's a bald money grab. Submittable overlooks this abuse, too. Arrrgghhh!
Wow, LindaAnn, that is nuts! I've seen those fee-based contests before that haven't chosen winners. I steer clear. The last chance opps which really aren't -- how lame. :P Thanks for the updates.
Yes! NUTS! Do not think we haven't complained, written letters to point it out, requested certain accounts be removed - and Submittable replies it does not "police the platform." . . . . . . Yes, sometimes we are able to do our own due diligence, i.e., check to see if a website is still active, etc. But I've done this & I've gotten stuck (due to "bad actors"). Yes! Platform manipulation is real. EX: Street Lit & The Blood Pudding have gamed the platform for more than 3 years . . . every day. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . OK, Submittable: start policing, please!
Submittable has every right to "police" what it allows on its platform. There's no 1st amendment right on Submittable any more than any other platform. That said, I think this is much ado about nothing. If you don't like the way Bull interacts, and I kind of don't blame anyone who doesn't, don't submit to Bull. No outlet is right for everyone. I feel like these sorts of things work themselves out as they should in the end.
I agree. Let them POLICE Submittable . . . much better! . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I encourage Submittable to start policing and put a stop to the outrageous "platform manipulation" they have closed their eyes to for years, abuse that involves separating writers and poets from their money. What sort of "platform manipulation" and abuse? See my reply above - - - with 3 examples.
i haven't received a rejection from Bull (guess vulgar likes vulgar), but a recent acceptance would likely offend Submittable's prudish ears as well: "Well, sweet fucking lord, this is dark," the email begins. I love editor Ben Drevlow's bluntness!
Submittable wrote this little tantrum with the twittery outrage of a cliche Victorian maiden lady. "Vulgar!" "Declination!" What pompous sputtering. I prefer the humble Anglo-Saxon self-deprecations of Bull. Take note, Submittable, this is from a rosy-cheeked grandmother whose diction is impeccable. Keep the lit mags honest, don't worry about four-letter words. (Never read Catullus, have you?)
Mary, the current issue of The New Yorker has a wonderful article on Catullus, helpfully pointing out the way he massaged the verb "fellate" to be a noun - and other felicities. :-)
RE: In Write As You Are, Susannah Rigg has posted “5 Things I've Learnt as a Reader for a Literary Magazine.” Says Rigg,
* * Rejection Doesn’t Mean Your Story Isn’t Good or That We Didn’t Like it
I know everyone says this but it really is TRUE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The key wording to look for in a rejection email will be in the finale. Was it mentioned that "this came very close" or "this piece made it to our final rounds"? Did the editors "warmly encourage" you to submit in future? Another example: was it "strongly suggested" that you send a submission for an upcoming issue? Did they use language such as "we'd LOVE to see another submission from you in our inbox" and "we hope you keep us in mind"? . . . . . . . On the other hand, if they wish you luck placing it elsewhere, please mark your writer's journal accordingly, because this phrase is a KISS-OFF. . . . . . . . . . . . I am posting this to help you assess your future submission opps & save you time going forward, dear Lit-Mag friends. x o
If you can’t handle a rejection where the editor is self deprecating with vulgarity, maybe you shouldn’t be submitting to THAT journal, maybe you should act like an adult and research where your sending your work; it’s likely if you’re offended by vulgarity you don’t want your work in that journal, surrounded by the work that journal publishes. I would have laughed, a rejection like that is a breath. If the email would’ve said, “I’m not publishing this piece of shite, you suck,” then blast them. But reporting to Submittable? Who, as the author says, allows known scams to continue posting “opportunities?” Especially if the people submitting are not smart enough to read a journal before submitting to them, to look into their culture and style? 😖 Hey, Submittable: You’re either policing or you aren’t! Shame on you!
IMO the rejection is very vulgar but the response from Submittable is also strange- who expected Submittable to speak in the first person singular like that? Are you sure it's not a joke?
I've personally worked with this editor with my own work. A pleasure. And his rejections (of which, of course, I see many at Submitit) are so much better than the typical (but fine) "we could not find a place for your work in our next issue." Bad Submittable. Bad.
This is off topic but .. a person in the critique group I recently joined changed the title of my story without asking first. (We file stories through WhatsApp.)
When I objected, he said this was a long-standing practice, though I have belonged for several months and this is the first time it's happened to me.
Speaking for myself I would never do such a thing.
I would certainly rather have a rejection like that from Bull than some of the bland, nothing forms I've received...
Rie, as a personal favor to you, please give me your email and I will flood your inbox with fake rejection notes that we can both laugh about in our memoirs. (big smile)
I absolutely love Bull's rejection template, it is hilarious! More pubs should send out such glee.
I don't know what to make of Submittable's sudden weirdness. Sounds to me like AI was implemented. :P
Yes, hilarious. I hope that now the Submittable "purity police squad" will get more active policing the fake contests and other platform manipulation that has been permitted.
I haven't run into that at all via Submittable. What do you mean by platform manipulation? Yuck. :\
Examples of "platform manipulation" - - - - Submittable permits numerous lit-mags to appear on its first page, posing as "last chance opps" with hours left before they close - - when in reality, the same lit-mags will occupy that identical position on the next day, the day after that, etc. . . . . . . . . . A 2nd example: Submittable permits fee-based contests to appear, year after year, when NO BOOKS have been chosen for a few years in a row. Why isn't this abuse policed better after they get complaints??? . . . . . . . . . . A 3rd example: Submittable permits various lit-mags to solicit writers who previously submitted; the email says that they did not receive "enough submissions" for the upcoming issue and why don't you send in something soon? When you get there, you will see there is a $$ sub fee! In other words, it's a bald money grab. Submittable overlooks this abuse, too. Arrrgghhh!
Wow, LindaAnn, that is nuts! I've seen those fee-based contests before that haven't chosen winners. I steer clear. The last chance opps which really aren't -- how lame. :P Thanks for the updates.
Yes! NUTS! Do not think we haven't complained, written letters to point it out, requested certain accounts be removed - and Submittable replies it does not "police the platform." . . . . . . Yes, sometimes we are able to do our own due diligence, i.e., check to see if a website is still active, etc. But I've done this & I've gotten stuck (due to "bad actors"). Yes! Platform manipulation is real. EX: Street Lit & The Blood Pudding have gamed the platform for more than 3 years . . . every day. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . OK, Submittable: start policing, please!
Ah yes, The Ubiquitous Blood Pudding “opportunity.”
I received a rejection from Bull and it was so dang cute I almost didn't mind receiving it. They had me in stitches.
Nancy, have the stitches been removed? (Sorry! Bull's letter put me in "a mood" to be a bit wicked myself.) LOL
Submittable has every right to "police" what it allows on its platform. There's no 1st amendment right on Submittable any more than any other platform. That said, I think this is much ado about nothing. If you don't like the way Bull interacts, and I kind of don't blame anyone who doesn't, don't submit to Bull. No outlet is right for everyone. I feel like these sorts of things work themselves out as they should in the end.
I agree. Let them POLICE Submittable . . . much better! . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I encourage Submittable to start policing and put a stop to the outrageous "platform manipulation" they have closed their eyes to for years, abuse that involves separating writers and poets from their money. What sort of "platform manipulation" and abuse? See my reply above - - - with 3 examples.
Actually I think Submittable is right.
That rejection is awful.
What a shitty shitty, fucked up, talking-out-of-their asshole response from Submittable.
i haven't received a rejection from Bull (guess vulgar likes vulgar), but a recent acceptance would likely offend Submittable's prudish ears as well: "Well, sweet fucking lord, this is dark," the email begins. I love editor Ben Drevlow's bluntness!
Submittable wrote this little tantrum with the twittery outrage of a cliche Victorian maiden lady. "Vulgar!" "Declination!" What pompous sputtering. I prefer the humble Anglo-Saxon self-deprecations of Bull. Take note, Submittable, this is from a rosy-cheeked grandmother whose diction is impeccable. Keep the lit mags honest, don't worry about four-letter words. (Never read Catullus, have you?)
Mary, the current issue of The New Yorker has a wonderful article on Catullus, helpfully pointing out the way he massaged the verb "fellate" to be a noun - and other felicities. :-)
RE: In Write As You Are, Susannah Rigg has posted “5 Things I've Learnt as a Reader for a Literary Magazine.” Says Rigg,
* * Rejection Doesn’t Mean Your Story Isn’t Good or That We Didn’t Like it
I know everyone says this but it really is TRUE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The key wording to look for in a rejection email will be in the finale. Was it mentioned that "this came very close" or "this piece made it to our final rounds"? Did the editors "warmly encourage" you to submit in future? Another example: was it "strongly suggested" that you send a submission for an upcoming issue? Did they use language such as "we'd LOVE to see another submission from you in our inbox" and "we hope you keep us in mind"? . . . . . . . On the other hand, if they wish you luck placing it elsewhere, please mark your writer's journal accordingly, because this phrase is a KISS-OFF. . . . . . . . . . . . I am posting this to help you assess your future submission opps & save you time going forward, dear Lit-Mag friends. x o
If you can’t handle a rejection where the editor is self deprecating with vulgarity, maybe you shouldn’t be submitting to THAT journal, maybe you should act like an adult and research where your sending your work; it’s likely if you’re offended by vulgarity you don’t want your work in that journal, surrounded by the work that journal publishes. I would have laughed, a rejection like that is a breath. If the email would’ve said, “I’m not publishing this piece of shite, you suck,” then blast them. But reporting to Submittable? Who, as the author says, allows known scams to continue posting “opportunities?” Especially if the people submitting are not smart enough to read a journal before submitting to them, to look into their culture and style? 😖 Hey, Submittable: You’re either policing or you aren’t! Shame on you!
IMO the rejection is very vulgar but the response from Submittable is also strange- who expected Submittable to speak in the first person singular like that? Are you sure it's not a joke?
They better not mess with Bull.
I wish all rejections read more like that!
I've personally worked with this editor with my own work. A pleasure. And his rejections (of which, of course, I see many at Submitit) are so much better than the typical (but fine) "we could not find a place for your work in our next issue." Bad Submittable. Bad.
This is off topic but .. a person in the critique group I recently joined changed the title of my story without asking first. (We file stories through WhatsApp.)
When I objected, he said this was a long-standing practice, though I have belonged for several months and this is the first time it's happened to me.
Speaking for myself I would never do such a thing.
ahhhh omg thank u sm for reading n sharing my post!!! cannot explain how much it means <3