Thursday, March 01, 2007

The Good, The Bad, and the Clerically Ill (Ongoing) Part 6

The Good:
Matt DiGangi and Editors @ Thieves Jargon


An interesting email, part preformatted response, part additional talk about my work. Basically, they're passing on my submission, but said they all came to the consensus that I'm interesting to read and they’d like to read more in the near future. Of note is that this was probably the most elegant and well-written rejection I've ever received. They know sound at this publication. I comes across clearly.


The Bad:
Nancy DeCamillis @ Sculptural Pursuits

I received an email from the editor stating they had received my poems, but that they wouldn’t be considering my submission because they thought the poems good, and would rather me resubmit them for their about-to-end contest. This contest was scheduled to be decided at the end of the week. Oh, I'm sure they would have preferred that. It costs $35 bucks to submit to their contest. I don’t think I need to spell out what a collossal money-grope this is. How does that work, exactly? Thanks for submitting, but we won't read these, because we read them and we'd rather you re-submit them with money? I suppose I’d end up in their magazine next year, if I won. A little couth could go a long ways here. If you’re going to excavate for contest entries, at least have the courtesy to be inobvious about it. I can smell a product pitch a mile away, and it’s not as if this is a broad demographic we’re hitting up: poetry related to sculpting. What possible big demand could there be for poetry relating to sculpting? It’s like a magazine for rap songs that rap about country songs. It's kind of strange that I even had some sculpture-related poetry to send, but I did, and thought I’d see if they were interested. $35 oily dollars... I’ll pass, thanks.

The Clerically Ill:
Editors @ A Public Space

Preformatted rejection. Nothing of interest at all. The reason this qualifies for ‘Clerically Ill’ is their submission and tracking system. I found their online submission form (and the trend of using them in general) to be pretty cold and atrocious. It's also a hideous way to waste your time, going to the site day after day, entering in your username and password, clicking sign-in, then seeing your submission listed with the word 'received' next to it for several months. That's around 90 times I went to their track-your-submission page, believing that I would only know their response if I continued checking the site. In the end, after checking and checking, they finally decided to reject the poems, which was fine, but then they sent me an email to let me know. This was frustrating. Of course, I prefer an email but what possible use does the sign-in-and-track-your-submission page serve if they just send you an email when they’ve decided anyway? It renders the entire check-back process this publication utilizes void. They should ditch the track-your-submission page, as it convinces writers that it’s the only way they’ll know if their work was accepted or not. Submitters might check it day after day after day, only to discover at the end of the long wait that they didn’t need to type in their username and password and wait for the results to load those 90 or so times. They could have skipped it and waited like they would for any other magazine. The track-your-submission page has to go. It’s one more straw on a lively back.

1 comment:

Rachel said...

Theves Jargon - I've heard they're a tough one to get into. Nice that you got a personalized rejection with the invitation, then.

That's crap about the $35.

Rachel