I know they always say, read an issue to get a sense of what we like to publish. But that's a lot of money, unless the magazine has a free sample or something (or you're friends with a writer who submits to a lot of contests, so gets a lot of issues that way). So in case this is of interest, CLMP is currently having a lit mag showcase, where you can browse and read a whole bunch of lit mags for free. Check it out: https://www.clmp.org/news/20-years-of-literary-magazines/
Oo! Thank you. That's awesome. And haha, I know. I will talk about that in my analyzing for quality lesson next week. But when a lit mag asks you to read, but forces you to pay to read, it is a big pet peeve of mine.
I'm late to this party, so I will just say what others have said: this particular lesson is brilliant. If the others hadn't been great enough to make me subscribe--and they were--this one certainly was. (Some verb tenses were obviously harmed in the making of the previous sentence.)
Aw yay! Thank you! Yes these last two weeks are much more strategy/analysis heavy rather than the more informative nature of the first six lessons. I am glad you're enjoying it so far.
I feel like a fly on the wall of a secret lit mag UN conference—undisclosed location, underground entrance with robot security. This information could not be more useful. THANKS BEN 🤪
Hahah you're welcome. I am glad it is helping. I've pulled it all together over many years and wasn't sure if anyone would find this absurd level of thought about submitting to lit mags useful
Wow, lots to ponder! Only halfway through but a couple of responses:
“And if they go past their response time, I start submitting again.” You mean I’ve had the key to my own jail cell this whole time? fffs. I added freaking, for emphasis. Seriously, mind blown. Weird, the things we latch onto. But also I just haven't (yet!) mastered the practice of simultaneous subs, even though I've always used it as a filter.
“Well-presented lit mags.” I agree, but begs the obvious question. I’ve always preferred seeing stories appear directly on a website vs. having to download a PDF. It almost always looks better, for one thing; is quicker to access, doesn't take up space on your hard drive, etc. But…thoughts? Maybe it's easier for mags to do it this way?
Yeah with response times and simsubs the way I see it is that it's a mutual agreement. You say I can't submit this anywhere else. OK. You tell me you'll respond within 6 months. 8 months later I don't think they have solo claim to your work. Trust has been broken, the way I see it. Ah and yeah. I am not a big fan of the pdf method. Or Issu. I think it's preference. Also PDFs are harder to read on mobile. But yeah, I think it's preference. To recreate a print feel. Not my preference but I don't see it as a reflection of effort on the editor's part.
"Mutual agreement!" Thank you for putting that in perspective.
"To recreate a print feel." I'm as Luddite as they come, and yet I prefer a more modern/easy to read format (since I've finally been dragged kicking and screaming here, to the new age). So that's interesting because I know a lot of writers are younger than me, so I would think they would want that also? Or they're not worried about it? It doesn't matter? I'm super curious!
Very helpful information. How do you know when a work is polished and ready to submit? How do you find a critique group, especially for creative nonfiction?
Thank you for considering everything when it comes to submitting - from ways to sort through lit mags to different methods. I've progressed from submitting everywhere to really finding the mags that fit my writing, kind of quality over quantity method. I'm not going to stress over getting published, if I keep at it, eventually my style will fit what a magazine is looking for.
Thank you. When I started submitting I always felt like everyone knew stuff I didn't. Then once I had done it a long time, I realized -> no, just nobody has really dug deep and given a comprehensive breakdown of it all
So glad I took out a subscription; worth every penny! Thanks for this.
I read the ones that draw me in. I'm currently in love with two, but I have a spreadsheet with all the mags I have dealings with. I record all the gorey details.
1) this is a great resource — I used to be good about researching lit mags and tbh have really fallen out of the habit. need to be better about setting aside a little time, and I love the tips on passive vs active analysis.
1) thank you! Yes, getting into the habbit is the toughest part. Unfortunately I've never found any advice that helps me build good habits. Luck and time. 2) hahaha it's the best. We have a fridge full of kiwis. It's absurd. Eat them all of the time. I never used to eat kiwis much because I hated peeling them. Now they're my favorite.
I read Atomic Habits recently and it actually really inspired some good habits. I’d recommend — there’s something about a habit tracker that makes it fulfilling to cross off something from your list haha
I admit I'm also one who generally has not read mags of where I've submitted to. I do try to skim here and there if anything.
At first I was submitting everything to everywhere. Now I'm more picky. I do pay attention to what lit mags are looking for. Although there are definitly some who all say the same stupid thing, but worded differently.
hahaha yes that is fairly common. Plenty look for the same thing. Especially when you get a feel for some of the really top lit mags who are into very literary works. There can be little variation. I find the most variation that stands out with quality and style happens in mid-tier journals.
Devastation Baby. I like to see categories so didn't love just the pictures at first. But it's a clean aesthetic and once I clicked in I read some stories that resonated. But also I still like to know what kind of story I might be reading? Even though it's good for exploring what you maybe didn't think you liked. The mission statement under the about tab was clear, but the "currently closed for subs" without an idea of when they will open was...unnerving? I worked as a technical writer back in the day and love specifics. So that I know the size and shape of the container in which I'm able to play.
100% We've actually been working on developing a course for lit mag editors. Things like clear and specific reading period guidelines. Devastation Baby is newer. I think they're off to a great start (also I love their name). But I think sometimes editors don't consider something like this because they are newer or are more interested in the editorial side of things and not always thinking about how different writers schedule submissions.
A course for lit mag editors would be amazing! They want to reach us as much as we want to reach them. We all have our specific glasses on that magnify some things while losing others. How to bridge that gap…
Wigleaf. It looks like a secret club I don't know the password for. Like, can you sub original pieces or they're "just" an aggregation of great already-pubbed pieces? Not that there's anything wrong with gathering great stories, and I especially love super short ones, but I'm not clear.
Ah yes! They suffer from the 'nav labelling' problem. Their guidelines are under 'About.' But they are also well known for their Top-50 which is aggregated from around the web.
Emergence. This one is beyond me. Too specific/too intellectual/too something. It's not them, it's me. This exercise is great for thinking about our personal aesthetic, obsessions, and what we think we're capable of communicating.
I'm glad. I think aesthetics is really important while exploring lit mags. Not only design but the writing itself. Emergence is our designer's favorite lit mag. He is always gushing over it.
Good stuff though maybe... more raccoons
hahah on it
I know they always say, read an issue to get a sense of what we like to publish. But that's a lot of money, unless the magazine has a free sample or something (or you're friends with a writer who submits to a lot of contests, so gets a lot of issues that way). So in case this is of interest, CLMP is currently having a lit mag showcase, where you can browse and read a whole bunch of lit mags for free. Check it out: https://www.clmp.org/news/20-years-of-literary-magazines/
Oo! Thank you. That's awesome. And haha, I know. I will talk about that in my analyzing for quality lesson next week. But when a lit mag asks you to read, but forces you to pay to read, it is a big pet peeve of mine.
I'm late to this party, so I will just say what others have said: this particular lesson is brilliant. If the others hadn't been great enough to make me subscribe--and they were--this one certainly was. (Some verb tenses were obviously harmed in the making of the previous sentence.)
Aw yay! Thank you! Yes these last two weeks are much more strategy/analysis heavy rather than the more informative nature of the first six lessons. I am glad you're enjoying it so far.
I feel like a fly on the wall of a secret lit mag UN conference—undisclosed location, underground entrance with robot security. This information could not be more useful. THANKS BEN 🤪
Hahah you're welcome. I am glad it is helping. I've pulled it all together over many years and wasn't sure if anyone would find this absurd level of thought about submitting to lit mags useful
Wow, lots to ponder! Only halfway through but a couple of responses:
“And if they go past their response time, I start submitting again.” You mean I’ve had the key to my own jail cell this whole time? fffs. I added freaking, for emphasis. Seriously, mind blown. Weird, the things we latch onto. But also I just haven't (yet!) mastered the practice of simultaneous subs, even though I've always used it as a filter.
“Well-presented lit mags.” I agree, but begs the obvious question. I’ve always preferred seeing stories appear directly on a website vs. having to download a PDF. It almost always looks better, for one thing; is quicker to access, doesn't take up space on your hard drive, etc. But…thoughts? Maybe it's easier for mags to do it this way?
Yeah with response times and simsubs the way I see it is that it's a mutual agreement. You say I can't submit this anywhere else. OK. You tell me you'll respond within 6 months. 8 months later I don't think they have solo claim to your work. Trust has been broken, the way I see it. Ah and yeah. I am not a big fan of the pdf method. Or Issu. I think it's preference. Also PDFs are harder to read on mobile. But yeah, I think it's preference. To recreate a print feel. Not my preference but I don't see it as a reflection of effort on the editor's part.
"Mutual agreement!" Thank you for putting that in perspective.
"To recreate a print feel." I'm as Luddite as they come, and yet I prefer a more modern/easy to read format (since I've finally been dragged kicking and screaming here, to the new age). So that's interesting because I know a lot of writers are younger than me, so I would think they would want that also? Or they're not worried about it? It doesn't matter? I'm super curious!
Very helpful information. How do you know when a work is polished and ready to submit? How do you find a critique group, especially for creative nonfiction?
thank you! I am going to go over that next week
I love you guys (in a non-creepy way).
hahah thank you
Thank you for considering everything when it comes to submitting - from ways to sort through lit mags to different methods. I've progressed from submitting everywhere to really finding the mags that fit my writing, kind of quality over quantity method. I'm not going to stress over getting published, if I keep at it, eventually my style will fit what a magazine is looking for.
Thank you. When I started submitting I always felt like everyone knew stuff I didn't. Then once I had done it a long time, I realized -> no, just nobody has really dug deep and given a comprehensive breakdown of it all
So glad I took out a subscription; worth every penny! Thanks for this.
I read the ones that draw me in. I'm currently in love with two, but I have a spreadsheet with all the mags I have dealings with. I record all the gorey details.
Hahah the gorey details are where all of the fun is at. Thank you for subscribing! I appreciate it a lot. We have a lot of plans for this program
1) this is a great resource — I used to be good about researching lit mags and tbh have really fallen out of the habit. need to be better about setting aside a little time, and I love the tips on passive vs active analysis.
2) I think the kiwi trick is wonderful 🤣
1) thank you! Yes, getting into the habbit is the toughest part. Unfortunately I've never found any advice that helps me build good habits. Luck and time. 2) hahaha it's the best. We have a fridge full of kiwis. It's absurd. Eat them all of the time. I never used to eat kiwis much because I hated peeling them. Now they're my favorite.
I read Atomic Habits recently and it actually really inspired some good habits. I’d recommend — there’s something about a habit tracker that makes it fulfilling to cross off something from your list haha
I love this post.
and it loves you
Is there a link to the maurice method? I clicked around but couldn't find it.
Hi! Yep. I will try to remember to link it on my next lesson, but you can find it here: https://www.chillsubs.com/blog/maurice-carlos-ruffin
I admit I'm also one who generally has not read mags of where I've submitted to. I do try to skim here and there if anything.
At first I was submitting everything to everywhere. Now I'm more picky. I do pay attention to what lit mags are looking for. Although there are definitly some who all say the same stupid thing, but worded differently.
hahaha yes that is fairly common. Plenty look for the same thing. Especially when you get a feel for some of the really top lit mags who are into very literary works. There can be little variation. I find the most variation that stands out with quality and style happens in mid-tier journals.
Devastation Baby. I like to see categories so didn't love just the pictures at first. But it's a clean aesthetic and once I clicked in I read some stories that resonated. But also I still like to know what kind of story I might be reading? Even though it's good for exploring what you maybe didn't think you liked. The mission statement under the about tab was clear, but the "currently closed for subs" without an idea of when they will open was...unnerving? I worked as a technical writer back in the day and love specifics. So that I know the size and shape of the container in which I'm able to play.
100% We've actually been working on developing a course for lit mag editors. Things like clear and specific reading period guidelines. Devastation Baby is newer. I think they're off to a great start (also I love their name). But I think sometimes editors don't consider something like this because they are newer or are more interested in the editorial side of things and not always thinking about how different writers schedule submissions.
A course for lit mag editors would be amazing! They want to reach us as much as we want to reach them. We all have our specific glasses on that magnify some things while losing others. How to bridge that gap…
Wigleaf. It looks like a secret club I don't know the password for. Like, can you sub original pieces or they're "just" an aggregation of great already-pubbed pieces? Not that there's anything wrong with gathering great stories, and I especially love super short ones, but I'm not clear.
Ah yes! They suffer from the 'nav labelling' problem. Their guidelines are under 'About.' But they are also well known for their Top-50 which is aggregated from around the web.
Emergence. This one is beyond me. Too specific/too intellectual/too something. It's not them, it's me. This exercise is great for thinking about our personal aesthetic, obsessions, and what we think we're capable of communicating.
I'm glad. I think aesthetics is really important while exploring lit mags. Not only design but the writing itself. Emergence is our designer's favorite lit mag. He is always gushing over it.