The problem with literary journals

14 comments on “The problem with literary journals”

1. Rhonda says:
   September 20th, 2006 at 9:31 am

   One Story is great! Every 3 weeks you get a small booklet, about 4″x5″, plainly laid out and stapled and small enough to fit in a purse or backpack. The stories are pretty good, for the most part. In a year, I’ve only come across one that I thought wasn’t “worthy”. Worth the money! And a quick read, which seems to be the complaint of this article.

2. B says:
   September 20th, 2006 at 10:40 am

   Most literary journals are the conceit of the masthead. Purely.
   Of the ones I skim (notice I did not say “read”) regularly, the
   mission of the editors does not seem to be to contribute
   to the ongoing conversation about the relevance of contemporary
   literature. Nor do the editorial decisions reflect the assumption that
   contemporary literature is relevant, end of conversation. What they
   DO reflect, more often than not, is “The best writing we could find.”
   How Snapple! Basically, you’re spending $5-$15 for a personal shopper.
   With two exceptions (the fruit of my skimming these past few years),
   if that shopper is shopping lit journal poetry, it’s heartbreaking.

3. B says:
   September 20th, 2006 at 10:41 am

   PS- it looks like I’m writing bad poetry, myself, but that’s because
   the comment box eats my words on the righthand side and I’m suspicious
   of what I can’t see. :-)

4. Lorna says:
   September 20th, 2006 at 5:26 pm

   Other than creating publishing credits for emerging writers &/or
   academics, what is the point of lit mags? This is not meant as a
   rhetorical question. Given the few hours (minutes?) on any given day
   that most people can devote to reading, why risk your time on unknown
   writers? I read these journals — albeit selectivly — to find new ideas, fresh ways of using language. But having said that, I do tend to read the writers
   I recognize first . . .

5. Franklin Carter says:
   September 20th, 2006 at 8:07 pm

   Brooklyn Copeland:

   When your writing in the comment box disappears off the righthand side of the screen, try clicking on the maximize button in the upper righthand corner of your screen. It temporarily restores the comment box to the entire screen.

   But there’s an even better way to cope. Write your message in a Word file. After you’ve perfected your comment, copy and paste it into the comments box. Problem solved.

6. David Ross says:
   September 21st, 2006 at 9:42 am

   The purpose of literary magazines is actually to eliminate toxic writers.

7. T-Bone says:
   September 21st, 2006 at 11:37 am

   Its an interesting question.

   On one hand, we absolutley NEED literary magazines to filter writers and get them publications (its hard enough to publish a collection of short stories as it is, how many would be published if stroies hadn’t been in magazines first?)

   But I do find it hard to justify reading many of them. I say many because there are a few that are of such high quality that I’m pretty much assured of it being as worthwhile as some other contemporary book. McSweeney’s springs to mind here.

   Like the article says though lit mags are so huge that even if I want to read and support them, how many can I really read? I’ve still got a pile of McSweeney’s back issues. Its hard enough finding time to read the novels we want to, much less a bunch of literary magazines. And if one IS going to subscribe to one or two, it seems like there is a pretty small group of ones that stand so far above the others there just doesn’t seem to be any compelling reason to subscribe to…. well I won’t name names.

   I don’t totally understand B’s comments though.
   An anthology is pretty much “the best writing we could find” but that doesn’t make them bad. In fact, often anthologies/quality lit mags are the best place to go for short ficiton or poetry. There are plenty of authors whose stories read very well by themselves, but when grouped together get very repetitive and boring. Adam Haslett springs to mind as a recent author I read.

   Also, I’m sure I’m not the only one who enjoys reading a smattering of poetry but doesn’t want to buy poetry books.

8. Franklin Carter says:
   September 21st, 2006 at 12:43 pm

   Even if I max/min the screen, the box elongates itself the first time
   I start typing.

   Cunning ninja. :-)

9. B says:
   September 21st, 2006 at 12:44 pm

   Oi! That wasn’t meant to be an impersonation! Heh.

10. B says:
    September 21st, 2006 at 1:03 pm

    T-Bone:

    To clarify- “the best we could find” isn’t enough of an explanation for me.
    I don’t trust an editor who can’t justify throwing yet another poorly read
    ‘zine or journal into the mix. Unless there’s a point, it becomes a
    vanity project, and generally reads as such.

    You’d think there’d be more discussion about the writing, itself, in these
    journals, but more often than not it’s cover-to-cover crap-wading and
    back-patting. Though I find them very tacky, theme issues can help a
    bewildered reader try to make sense of the inclusions, barring a coherent
    mission statement or letter-from-the-editor.

    Maybe I’m just too picky. Or I haven’t found what I’m looking for.

    I read mainly poetry in journals. When I find a poet I like, I buy
    their book or look them up online. If anyone can recommend a reliable
    publication, I’m open to click on the link! :-)

11. ZW says:
    September 23rd, 2006 at 8:32 am

    The problem is that a lot of folks who complain about the plethora of lousy journals seem to think the solution is another lousy journal, not realizing that if you only have a few hours on the weekend and a volunteer staff of uneven talent and vision, you’ll necessarily only add to the landfill. In Canada, just about the only lit journal consistently worth reading is _Brick_. (I’d include _Maisonneuve_, but its focus is really too broad to call it a literary magazine, per se–more like a very literate general interest mag.) Not surprisingly, they actually go after content and don’t just passively receive it; that content includes a lot of non-fiction. The format of “a bunch of fiction, a bunch of poetry, followed by a few reviews” is so static and old–and so hard to fill with high quality work–that it’s doomed to mediocrity. Even more so when most of the content is drawn from unsolicited submissions. _Brick’s_ editorial board is well-enough connected to get good writing from major names, both from here and abroad. One of our most venerable little magazines–the oldest in the country, actually–routinely publishes work by the grad students on its masthead. Now this isn’t necessarily going to be bad work, but when it happens every issue and most of the work is undistinguishable in quality and voice from anything else in any other journal, it’s an embarrassment. (Not to mention the fact that it totally kills what little cachet there is in having your work published in a journal.) It’s no wonder magazines like this have to pad their subscription figures with vanity-publishing contests.

12. marc fitten says:
    September 28th, 2006 at 10:07 pm

    Gee zus! This stuff ticks me off Talk about the pot calling the kettle names. If a literary journal is the “conceit of the masthead,” what the hell is a blogger?

    And you know what else? The argument is flawed anyway. In the end, the free market takes care of us all. Journals that impact can continue. Journals that don’t, fold. Five years. Ten years. However long it takes, if a journal doesn’t matter, it will stop publishing. I imagine it will be the same for litblogs in the years to come.

    The point that people seem to be missing is that inside the journals, there is a literary conversation that is being supported by people who care, and that is a very good thing. I PAY for original translations. I pay for original poems. I pay for original fiction. As far as I’m concerened, you should be calling me Cosimo and thanking my journal, and journals like mine for helping to support artists who wouldn’t get help otherwise.

    Were there too many patrons in Florence??? Please. The best will survive.

    Regardng format, well, as far as the book reviews at the end go, they must matter because enough publicists from the “real” houses call and pitch. Likewise, enough agents contact us wanting the names of those unknown writers to make me want to keep publishing unknown writers.

    We’re a part of the machine. The part that the “real” houses divested themselves of because it cost them money. The part that allows a writer to make mistakes or explore his voice.

    Did you know that submissions to many of these journals are in the thousands. The thousands! In fact, we closed the transom, and they’re still coming in. I think this might be what an editor is lamenting when they say nobody is buying. The number of submissions and subscriptions don’t jibe.

    But, hey, whatever. If you “love” literature, why actually take the time to go wading through the marketplace? You saw your friend with the dumbass glasses reading McSweeneys. You heard Beck wrote an intro. It must be good enough for you, right?

13. Amanda says:
    May 24th, 2007 at 2:29 pm

    i read literary journals. i have discovered writers there i didn’t know exist; i have submitted to my fair share and i subscribe
    to a few also. i find it interesting to see the various styles published in various journals, their orientation and evolution.
    i prefer journals which also include interviews with writers. i also enjoy some online journals as well.

    as a small press publisher of a poetry journal and a website which features poetry, i also receive a lot of submissions.
    we have an editorial board of 10 who go thru the poems without seeing names of writers.
    i get excited to discover writers i haven’t heard of or read something fresh by a writer who is well published.
    i am also interested when i read the submissions to discover how many of those who submit are obviously not reading
    contemporary poetry. it is all a learning experience.

    when i buy poetry collections i notice that many of these literary journals are where the poems were initially published.
    the lit journal offers writers a chance to test out their work and readers the chance to discover writing that someone thinks
    is good. what’s wrong with that? how else could it be done? i wish more people would subscribe to the literary journals out there.

    the reason i write, the reason i am a publisher, the reason i do anything is to explore and to learn. to my mind, the literary
    journal serves the purpose of exploration and learning very well…for both readers and writers. what is vain about wanting
    to read or participate in the on going literary dialog in whatever way one can?

14. Sherra says:
    August 1st, 2007 at 5:02 pm

    An alternative experience: I grew up in Hong Kong reading Chinese newspapers, which usually have a literary or quasi-literary section that is published every day. It includes short essays by fifteen or so regular writers, serial fiction, and sometimes longer essays, interviews, translations and poetry. More importantly, many of them have an all-year open submission policy in one or more of these genres. This section is published every day, and reaches every person who buys the newspaper for whatever reason. People who don’t think of themselves as literary read it anyway just because it is there. True, the material usually does not push the stylistic envelope – other venues exist for that – but many people are published and read. They range from the writer with serious literary ambition to the housewife or retiree with the occasional inspiration. Literature – or writing – is a democratic and more casual institution.

Discuss