Comments on: A Necessarily Incomplete But Hopefully Helpful List That Proves The Slush Pile Has a Pulse

By: Lorri

Lorri — Mon, 01 Mar 2010 23:27:37 +0000

So here’s something I’ve wondered a long time: why do all magazines and journals, even the notoriously difficult to break into, give submission guidelines if they don’t intend to go through the submissions that come in? Wouldn’t it save everyone on both sides a lot of time if some of them just admitted they’re not open to seeing writng unless they solicit you? Is it like the corporate manager who has to post the job opening even though he intends to offer the job to someone who’s already an insider?

By: Rick Rofihe

Rick Rofihe — Fri, 12 Feb 2010 22:15:08 +0000

I’m the Editor of Anderbo.com — half of our stories, 90% of our poetry, and almost all of our non-fiction come out of the slush. (At the same time, we don’t accept much of anything….

By: Dave

Dave — Tue, 09 Feb 2010 18:46:20 +0000

I’ve been fiction co-editor at cream city review for two years now, and I believe every single story we’ve published in that time has been unsolicited. While we’ve published some terrific established authors this way, it’s just as likely to be an author’s first print publication. In short, “slush” is our bread-and-butter, and we can never see too much of it. Thanks for the plug!

By: Teri

Teri — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 17:00:56 +0000

I was Fiction editor for a smaller journal (a print annual) in 2009 and there was a huge chasm between the good, bad and ugly that came through our (on-line submission) door. We received 400+ submissions and, frankly, many were nowhere close to publishable. Some were barely readable. Too many. About 40 were good enough for the “maybe pile,” and 10 or 12 were absolute jewels. With room for only 7 or 8 pieces, we had no choice but to reject a few excellent pieces.

I understand that Reed received more than double that number of submissions this year.

By: Dan

Dan — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 16:01:27 +0000

Despite Seth’s dislaimer that this is not a comprehensive list, I really have to take issue with it. The listed pubs are some of the top literary journals in the country, i.e. really hard to crack and break into. Do they publish from the slush pile? Sure. Some more than others. If you look at the stories One Story publishes, for example, a good portion of them are excerpted from upcoming story collections that have big name publishers. I’m afraid some people might misconstrue this list and think these are approachable markets. Indeed, they may be more approachable than the New Yorker, but still they are very selective. For a lot writers, getting into these journals is like the pie in the sky. Speaking from my own experience, I’ve only managed to break into one of them, McSweeney’s (online). Not to say people shouldn’t submit to these journals, just remember that the odds are very, very, very tough.

By: Teri

Teri — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 15:06:16 +0000

Thanks, Seth. This is a a great forum to get the word out there. I write fiction and nonfiction, and here is a list of mags who’ve either accepted my “slush pile” work OR given personal feedback on the rejection. I also keep track of response times so I’ll include those: Copper Nickel (3-12 wks), The MacGuffin (15 wks), Avery (6 wks), Kenyon Review (3 wks), Zyzzyva (4 wks), Bellingham Review (8 wks), Southern Review (3-9 wks), Missouri Review (20 wks), Sycamore Review (6 wks). Also, on-line journals: Bananafish, Ampersand, and Guernica.

By: James Engelhardt

James Engelhardt — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 14:52:55 +0000

Seth, thanks for the mention. I have two pieces from the slush pile on my desk right now…but that’s only after a long process of reading by other people. We consign everyone to the slush, and we are always delighted to find fantastic work by people we’ve never heard from before. I’ll add my voice to Jessa’s in thanking you for sticking up for the slush; it’s our greatest resource!

By: Jessa Marsh

Jessa Marsh — Sat, 06 Feb 2010 18:58:44 +0000

Thanks for the mention. We publish completely out of slush and I often end up loving stories by writers who have never been published before. This is a nice entry. I’m glad to see you sticking up for the slush pile and keeping the hope alive for new writers.

By: Seth Fischer

Seth Fischer — Fri, 05 Feb 2010 18:09:25 +0000

Thanks everyone! Wolf, that is a very, very interesting idea. I like it a lot. The one thing I have questions about is paying for the editor ratings, but then again, you gotta make money somehow. I just hate that writers are ever charged for anything, but then again, life isn’t really fair, and writers should know that, I guess. (Seth sulks off into sunset)

By: Wolf Hoelscher

Wolf Hoelscher — Thu, 04 Feb 2010 17:39:40 +0000

Great article, Seth. I think every writer has a right to be outraged at the idea of publishers abandoning their slush piles. In this day and age they should be using new technologies for finding new writers, not simply passing the buck off to agents.

I’m a writer and a former acquisitions editor and I’m so fed up with the slush pile as it exists now that I’m starting my own site called Pubmission (www.pubmission.com). It’s different from the ones you mentioned in that you can see which publishers actually subscribe, and you don’t have to wait for other writers to give you glowing reviews. You’ll have more control over the fate of your work: You can send your submission directly to publishers and/or keep it in the general database where publishers can search for it based on the tags you assign to it.

It’s easier for publishers to use, too, because they can get e-mail alerts showing them what’s arrived in their slush pile and a brief abstract of each submission, saving them tons of review time. No more paper cuts. No more wasting trees.

The site is in development and I hope to launch April 1. I’d love feedback. There’s a survey and a blog on the site.