Comments | fibitz: Call and Response

fibitz

Call and Response

Feb 04, 2009 09:13

I was ranting again about places that never respond to submissions-and then I got handed a stack of postal submissions that the general editor of Mobius: A Journal of Social Change (of which I am poetry editor) had allowed to accumulate, without my knowledge, since JUNE (yes, heads have rolled). On the other hand, that's June of '08. And most of ( Read more... )

Comments 10

anonymous February 4 2009, 16:41:23 UTC

I have not logged in today, but this is David Kopaska-Merkel. I pretty much agree with everything you say, with one exception. I don't think it's a good idea to send a verbally abusive message to an editor, no matter how you have suffered because of that editor's incompetence etc.. My preference is to politely withdraw the submission and warn other writers (as you have done). you are completely correct that prompt responses to inquiries are fundamental to good editing/publishing. You are also right on the money that a polite inquiry about a submission in case it has been lost or was never received, is perfectly all right once the response time has elapsed. As an editor, I welcome such inquiries. I always ask the poet to resend the missing piece. I have bought some of these, and was very grateful for the inquiry.

In nearly complete agreement fibitz February 4 2009, 17:52:14 UTC

David is correct, of course-and it's a good idea before sending off premature hissy-fits to bear in mind that delay may not only be due to an innocent mistake, but possibly to your work being held for further consideration. But for a journal that is demonstrably receiving your inquiries to take over a year to make a decision is intolerable, and as for accepting work, which totally precludes its submission elsewhere, and then neither publishing as promised nor responding to inquiries.... The only time I've been really intemperate was in withdrawing from EOAGH, where the provocation was spectacular, and I can't say I regret it.

New Friend ysabetwordsmith February 4 2009, 17:42:21 UTC

I followed you here from the link you sent on the SFPA elist; I have added you to my Friends list.

Regarding the matter of manuscript replies, here's my perspective as someone who is both writer and editor: It's reasonable to expect editors to treat writers decently. Many editors choose not to treat writers decently, and writers can choose to file those guidelines in the circular file and work with someone else. Editors who treat writers favorably will find their consideration paid off in the quality of submissions and the time saved.

However, when someone on one side behaves in a crass and unprofessional manner, the first question to ask on the other side is: how does your professional bearing apply to the situation? I generally don't think that ranting, especially in public, is a safe or effective response. (YMMV.) I send a brief, polite note and then move on to the next editor or writer on my list. A key reason for this is that I've observed, on several occasions, that public temper tantrums can make one look like a damn ( ... )

Re: New Friend fibitz February 4 2009, 18:18:02 UTC

Thanks for the input. I'm past being concerned with "safety"; forgive me for saying that, to me, in this context the term would translate to "self-serving cowardice." I don't mean that as a reflection on you: wiser heads than mine may well generate more effective means of driving change than ranting in public, but as I indicated, Duotrope is unreliable and offers no way to distinguish accurate responses from unreliable input. By stating circumstances and specifics (clearly and accurately, I hope), I'm validating what would be merely part of a range of stats. More importantly, within 5 minutes of the post going live, I began to get private e-mails from writers praising the post and expressing determination to begin withdrawing work from markets that had delayed their response excessively (note my caveat in reply to previous comment). I feel that it's important that writers as a group not support editors or markets that devalue their writing, and I'm concerned about the rise of increasingly predatory practices within the literary ( ... )

Re: New Friend ysabetwordsmith February 4 2009, 22:35:31 UTC

Caution (or in your terms, cowardice) isn't the only reason to refrain from ranting in public. Self-respect is a valid reason too. There are both subjective and objective concerns, and each person sets their own parameters.

I'm not surprised that you got a lot of quiet support. There is some value to be had from colorful personalities who make a giant public fuss over some bit of obnoxious behavior.

"I feel that it's important that writers as a group not support editors or markets that devalue their writing, and I'm concerned about the rise of increasingly predatory practices within the literary community at large."

Too true.

je_reviens February 4 2009, 21:36:21 UTC

I can only imagine the anger and frustration on your part. I can REALLY imagine it bc I have experienced same on a much smaller level ( ... )

EOAGH submission anonymous February 5 2009, 05:25:09 UTC

Dear F.J. Bergmann,

Here is what happened. Your poem was accepted for Issue 5 of EOAGH. The journal is published yearly. There was a delay of a few months between the publication of Issue 4 (very late 2007) and Issue 5 (early 2009), but Issue 5 is about to come out now. You never asked for clarification or information at any stage of this process after your poems were accepted. You withdrew your work just before the next issue was about to be published.

I pride myself on running my journal in an organized manner. Try to picture yourself in the position of an editor receiving 5-10 submissions per day, as I do. My responses to you were polite, positive, and clear.

Sincerely,

Tim Peterson
Editor, EOAGH

Re: EOAGH submission fibitz February 5 2009, 13:54:45 UTC

In fact I sent FIVE inquiries at different "stages of this process," either inquiring about my submission or asking if the journal was still a going concern. The only replies I ever received were to two messages that I had also copied to your webmaster (he replied promptly, twice). I received no response to my April '06 submission or its subsequent inquiries, which very politely asked for confirmation that my e-mails had been received and a date by which a decision might be forthcoming, until an acceptance (the only editorial response, other than your posting above) suddenly arrived-after an inquiry to the webmaster-in August '07-the following year. And then no further communication or responses to anything, until I withdrew the submission in January '09, nearly THREE years after my original submission ( ... )

Re: EOAGH submission time_shark February 5 2009, 14:10:51 UTC

Alas, receiving 5-10 submissions a day (which really isn't a lot, believe it or not) is no excuse whatsoever for not answering queries.

ajodasso February 5 2009, 17:57:11 UTC

Thankfully, I haven't had any negative experiences as of yet with response times (except for one print magazine out of London, which I think released one or two issues and then went under anyway). I'll agree with you on the ones that have/do respond promptly in that last paragraph, though! They take good care of their subsmissions.