Thu 10.15.09
A few weeks ago I sent out my semi-annual mass email to announce the fall’s newsletter (available as a free PDF download here, if I haven’t mentioned it). As always happens when you email 20,000 people, hundreds of them write back — most to say thanks, some to change an address, but then a fragrant few just to spread their craziness.
I was about to say that I don’t understand how people can get upset at a lowly little poetry magazine that runs at a loss for the love of the game — but I guess I do understand. 200 rejection letters a week is a lot of negativity to release in the atmosphere without expecting a little bit of blowback. That poetry editors don’t die from bad karma is probably proof there’s no such thing as karma.
Moreover, the volume of angry emails was exacerbated this fall because in the newsletter I actually asked for letters to the editor, so I could include the most interesting in a new section next spring. (If you have a question or comment about Rattle, write me a coherent email, and I’ll probably post it in e.8.) So not only do I deserve it, but I’m also asking for it. I figured the least I could do is share some of them.
I’m going in reverse-chronological order, because that’s how inboxes are arranged, and this one came in today. I might put it in the newsletter, because there’s a serious question I’d like to respond to underneath the crazy (Ignore the typos in all of these, I’m not going to bother writing “[sic]” every time, I’m just cutting and pasting.):
Editor Type:
Let’s see. You have a circ of 4000. What does that translate too? Oh, Wow, two niggardly contributor’s copies! Gee, I can buy the world with that. Yeah, like that’s gonna put food in my mouth. Hey everyone, look at my two copies, all shiny and new. I feel soo… special. I’m in the Big Times now! I’m a famous author now. I can go on the talk show circuit – Oprah here I come!
Soon to be famous,
Chris Roberts
Every time I field a complaint like this, I’m tempted to write back saying, “Good point — we should start profit-sharing with everyone we publish.” And then I’d send a bill for $500. But, of course, no one we’ve actually published ever makes this complaint — for some reason it’s only the people that get rejected over and over again, and would never seen any money even if we did start paying contributors. Funny, that. Or maybe noble, the selfless few who stand up for the 200 poets we exploit every year, out of the goodness in their hearts?
If you Google “Chris Roberts, poet,” the first thing that comes up is an essay attacking The New Yorker on hackwriters.com. A papertrail of patriotism. The essay is actually well-written and the arguments are valid. Maybe it just feels different when the criticism is aimed at you. Or maybe the difference is between a magazine with a circulation of a million selling ad space from a high rise in Times Square, and a magazine with a circulation of 4,000 that won’t even do ad swaps with other journals from a little cubicle. Or maybe there is no difference at all.
For the sake of balance, here’s a day-old email from one of those sad souls Chris Roberts feels the need to defend:
Dear Tim,
Forgive me as this note has been much delayed. Thank you so very much for including my poems in RATTLE. It’s an amazing magazine and I am so honored to be among such company. And it’s a gorgeous production (design, paper quality–wow!). Thanks over & over again.
Best,
Christine
For the record, I can’t think of anything that would make me happier than sending checks to contributors. If only…
Moving on:
Thanks for your e-mail announcements, but I think I’ve been rejected enough times from your journal to desist from submitting my work in general and in specific to Rattle. Your slips of paper for rejection forms are humiliating. I’m sure you get hundreds, maybe thousands of submissions, but really, you send the same form every time with nothing to offer really. Seems that is the way of poetry journals in our day and time, editors take no time to respond unless they feel it is in their best interest to reply, and they are so short-staffed that all the so many people that allegedly read the poems at Rattle, not one says anything worthwhile about the submission. In short, people that take the time to submit to your journal don’t get the benefit of a response, but that is the poetry and literary journal industry in our day. Maybe one day I will write something that would be worthwhile to publish in a journal, but I think that I don’t really care as most of the stuff I read is drivel anyways, even from the well-known journals like Poetry.
Thanks, but you probably can take me off your e-mail list at this point, as I don’t care to be informed in the future about your journal.
Yours sincerely,
Xxx Xxxxx xx Xxxxx
I redacted the name this time, because unlike Chris’s missive, this one seemed less like a comment he wanted published than a disheartened flailing of emotion. I tried to explain to him the nature of our transaction — that we’re trading opportunity, that I’m offering him the possibility of an audience, he’s offering me the possibility of poetry that an audience might want to read. My title may be editor, for some arcane reason, but when it comes to poetry, all I really am is a filter. I pick out gold from the garbage so our subscribers don’t have to. If you want editing, start a writers’ group. I do what I can, but I can’t do much, and as much as I want to help, I don’t “owe” you anything.
Next!
This is my favorite insult yet, set in a comedic structure, almost like a knock-knock joke. Such a casual delivery, too — it took two weeks to hear the punch line:
“Gail”: who funds your magazine?
Me: Why do you ask?
“Gail” (two weeks later): your subject matter. the pharm industry might throw you some money if you approached them.
Oh snap. This made me laugh out loud, and I don’t even know what she was trying to say. That we publish too many poems about illness? Do prescription drugs appear in any poems we’ve published recently? Maybe she just means that poets are crazy? I can certainly vouch for that. If you have any other ideas, let me know.
Well, there were many more where that came from, but I didn’t think to save them, and this is probably a good place to stop anyway. But tune in next time for more adventures from the poetry mailbag!
15 Responses to “ Letters to the Editor ”
Comments:
Leave a Reply
Trackbacks & Pingbacks:
-
Pingback from Poetry News For October 19, 2009 | Poetry Hut Blog
October 18th, 2009 at 9:03 pm[...] I was about to say that I don’t understand how people can get upset at a lowly little poetry magaz… [...]
October 15th, 2009 at 5:48 pm
Thank you SO much for posting those notes. After being up nearly 24 hours getting a newsletter and new issue live, I can’t think of anything that would’ve made me laugh more.
Love Rattle. Pharm backing might work.
October 15th, 2009 at 6:12 pm
No one seems to appreciate what we do, Angie — and when they say they appreciate it, I usually just assume they’re kissing up!
Is the new issue of Rose and Thorn up online yet? Imma check it out…
October 16th, 2009 at 2:32 pm
That’s pretty hilarious. I hope you take them all with a grain of salt…and it appears you do. I reckon that many of these folks should channel their emotions into improving their craft rather than writing the editor who rejected them.
I get rejections all the time…far more than I receive acceptances, even though I’ve amassed a ton of those over the past couple of years too. I’ve had three or four rejections from Rattle. No biggie. It’s a business, and it’s always a gamble — even if the editor likes your work he/she may not be able to fit it in due to its theme or style. And maybe it’s the best poem in the world to you and twenty friends, but it’s simply not to the editor’s taste.
Ultimately, poets interested in getting published have to understand that a rejection is not an affront. It is a part of the business, and is truly nothing personal.
Though Tim, I admit that I selfishly want you to receive more pained outbursts like the above, if only so I can have another hearty laugh at a future blog!
October 17th, 2009 at 10:39 am
Rattle is a beautiful mag, and you guys do an outstanding job, but the only issue I have is when you (other editors do this as well) post how many rejections you send out weekly, monthly, yearly, whatever, as well as post how many submissions you get for any given contest. I know you dig numbers, but do we really need to know precisely how many rejections you send out, or how many poets submitted to a given contest? I want to remain blissfully ignorant of how many thousands of “poets” are out there writing another narrative column for you to judge. Nights when I walk out my door, I want to continue deceiving myself that I’m the only one wearing a black turtleneck and matching beret walking in the rain toward some deserted cafe to write the next anthologized strip of words. Keep up the good work, but in my opinion, cut back on sharing the behind the scenes accounting. I think it just makes us poets sad, and gloomy, gloomier than we usually are.
October 17th, 2009 at 2:55 pm
I’m not speaking FOR Timothy here, but I have to ask you Alejandro: what part makes you sad and gloomy? Self-delusion is never healthy, and like I said in my comment above, the poetry publishing business IS, ultimately, a business. Ignorance is rarely blissful.
Additionally, I’m not sure if it’s apropos to be speaking for all poets. Personally, I love seeing these statistics. I don’t find them discouraging at all. As a matter of fact, I find it encouraging as you have to know with numbers like those that it couldn’t possibly be anything personal. I get no particular joy out of being published in a tiny journal that receives few submissions, as what does that say about their editorial standards…and by extension, your poetry? It’s not that great of a measuring stick, is it?
October 19th, 2009 at 7:12 am
The Chris Roberts thing made me laugh. I’m wondering what kind of search you are doing because when I put in those keywords all I get is this post. I used some other word combinations and found he sent two identical (identical to each other, not identical to the one he sent you) emails to Swill and HTMLGiant last year, which had the same voice and message. Also, the same article in hackwriters was also published in 3 A.M. That’s all I could find. Do you know if he has a blog or anything? Is he the guy from England? I know you’re not his agent but I’m curious.
October 19th, 2009 at 7:20 am
The “two niggardly contributor’s copies” guy — he sounds like the same guy who recently contacted another journal (university journal that published his work) with a similar (same?) response. That must be his standard procedure. Sounds psychotic to me. I appreciate knowing his name so I can be sure to have nothing to do with him.
As for karma, I believe in it and I think you’re measuring it wrong. What about all the good karma you create by publishing a journal and connecting poems to readers? The fact that you don’t take most poems submitted isn’t bad karma. Publishing work you don’t like or don’t think is good enough is not good karma. Your job is not to publish everyone who wants to be published, but putting together and sharing the type of magazine you believe in.
The people who insult and attack editors–almost always, they are the ones who do absolutely nothing for the poetry community. They don’t buy poetry books or journals. They don’t ask their local libraries to buy or subscribe to them. They don’t write reviews. They don’t arrange (or often even attend) readings for other poets. They don’t put forth any effort and time to publish or support other poets in any way whatsoever. It’s just about what everyone else can do for them.
October 19th, 2009 at 10:33 am
A little horn tooting:
I have never been ungracious in rejection. It might be because I have had plenty of practice being rejected, but I’d like to think it has something to do with understanding the world doesn’t owe me anything—not publication, not tax deductions, and not fame. Poetry journals owe me even less, seeing it’s my choice to submit.
There is also a lot to that word, “submit.”
You should out every poor sport.
October 19th, 2009 at 11:01 am
your note sent me to the subscription page for rattle,
and i paypal’d a year . . .
(you should add a “donation” option on that page)
October 19th, 2009 at 7:34 pm
Two copies is just fine! I’ve had some poems accepted in small zines that ask me to buy a copy if I can and I always buy at least two. We have to support our art with more than just our poems.
Thanks for Rattle- I always find something to enjoy!
shann
October 21st, 2009 at 12:45 pm
Another editor emailed me over the weekend — apparently Chris Roberts sends these emails to everyone, bad copy/paste jobs where he doesn’t even think to strip the plural from “Oh, Wow, one niggardly contributor’s copies!” Somehow I feel betrayed.
Thanks for all the comments.
Alejandro–It’s surprising to me that you find the numbers discouraging — I think across the board, the reason why editors do this is just the opposite: We don’t want to be discouraging, we want to inform everyone of how rare publication is. The opposite extreme would be saying, “We only rejected one person for this issue, and it was you!” How awful would that be?
Mather–I know nothing about Roberts other than what I posted. Your other comments were deleted because they don’t deserve to be posted.
Bill–Thanks for the subscription. There’s no donate button, because we don’t really take donations. We’re fully funded by our founders charitable foundation. (Say that three times fast.)
Reb–You’re right…and unfortunately there are a lot of those people. Selfish bastards, but that’s what we tend to grow in this country, so why shouldn’t our poets be the same…
October 22nd, 2009 at 7:08 pm
You folks are taking too kind an approach. I have reported Chris Roberts and his abusive emails to his Internet service provider. There are numerous capabilities for self-righteous writers to self-publish their work on the Internet, and through various self-publishing book mechanisms. People who wish to submit in accordance with our guidelines, posted on our website, are welcome to give us a try. Those who have differences of opinion are welcome to them, but should move on. Harassing overworked and underappreciated literary magazine editors – especially those who are not paid a salary, and operate without government grant funding – is unacceptable behavior. Thank you for making me aware I’m one of several literary magazine editors who has been accosted by unwanted emails from this “writer.” Frankly, I would have preferred to judge him by the quality of his poetry rather than the lack of taste or class in his emails, but he refused to provide us with that opportunity on our terms. We do not tolerate abuse here, of our writers or of any staff member.
November 5th, 2009 at 7:45 pm
It’s possible, Tim, that the person’s “pharm industry” comment was meant to imply that you publish poetry that puts people to sleep. That’s how I read it anyway.
If so, it’s a pretty weak joke.
November 18th, 2009 at 7:02 pm
I think she was trying to spell “farm” lol
XO