A couple of weeks ago, I ranted against a Wall Street Journal article that proclaimed “The Slush Pile is Dead.” The slush pile, for those who are unfamiliar, is the name for the large amount of unsolicited writing that’s submitted for publication to magazines and web sites.
Part of the reason for my reaction to the article, honestly, is that I’m also editor of an online literary magazine called The Splinter Generation that publishes 90% of its work from the slush pile. We spend untold hours reading through these submissions. In fact, that’s part of our mission: to find really good writers who aren’t known yet and who are being ignored by the big magazines and publishing houses. So the WSJ article, in essence, was saying that all our work amounted to nothing because only The Paris Review and Random House really matter.
Which is fine. They can ignore us. Maybe our work does amount to very little. We’re still new. But the problem is that they were ignoring dozens, if not hundreds, of other, better-known projects that thrive on the slush pile. And that made me mad. So you know what I did? I broke Rumpus Rule #1 and put together a list.
I emailed lots of writers, some of whom published books and others who had only published in a few mags, granted them full anonymity, and asked them for their nominations of the best lit journals that are good about publishing a few pieces out of the slush pile in every issue. The most common nominations are below* (note: No offense intended! This is an informal list. If you thrive on slush, and your project didn’t happen to be mentioned by the people I contacted, feel free to put your info in the comments section.)
Zyzzyva
Missouri Review
McSweeney’s
Crab Orchard Review
Prairie Schooner
Cream City Review
West Branch
Bat City Review
Blackbird
One Story
American Short Fiction
Mid-American Review
River Styx
Redheaded Stepchild
There’s more: Fictionaut is a great web site that allows authors to put their work up to be read by other writers, and lit mags have found pieces that they’ve published from it. Even HarperCollins has Authonomy, in which authors can post work to be “discovered” by agents or editors at the house. I also heard from some folks at Slush Pile Reader, a web site just out of beta, that aims to do Authonomy one better and publish the most popular stories that it’s writers put up while being a good deal more indie about it.
And though I think they really are the future, I haven’t even started with online journals, as only Blackbird was mentioned by the writers I contacted, though Monkeybicycle and Guernica are two I can think of right off the top of my head.
And this is just the tip of the iceberg.
But despite their condescension, the WSJ is touching on something important. Many of the authors I spoke to were worried that having big magazines and houses choose nothing from the slush pile is dangerous for the future of writing and for our culture.
Said one author, who wished to remain nameless:
“I mean, like it or not, there are very few gatekeepers to American letters, and although they are quite out of touch, the American literary public still turns to those big institutions to bring “new voices” into the world…I guess if your only goal as a writer is to be a cult figure, the you don’t give a shit about what the New Yorker is doing. But if you have dreams of a Big Literary Career, you can’t help but be frustrated by the lack of opportunities outside of the smaller to mid-range journals.
So, yeah, great numbers of journals read and publish slush. But how much does that matter on a cultural level? Maybe it’ll matter someday. Maybe, if we’re lucky, it’ll matter soon. But it matters very little today.”
Here’s an idea: Maybe it’s time everyone — from the small lit mags to the big publishing houses — agreed to open up their selection process so writers can know more about what they’re submitting to. It’d at least be a start. And editors might even get more of what they’re looking for.
*Note: This is not a list of mags that publish a large percentage of their slush pile … most receive too many submissions for that to be possible. This is a list of mags that have a good portion of each issue devoted to pieces they’ve discovered in the slush pile.
19 responses
I had a short conversation on Facebook with Jeanne Leiby, editor of The Southern Review, about the first article, and she said they publish from the slush pile all the time. When they published me a few years ago (before Leiby was editor), I was taken from the slush pile, so I can say they have a history of it. So does Quarterly West, for that matter, or anywhere that’s published me. (I’m open to being solicited–it just hasn’t happened yet.)
well put. and the lit mag i help out w/ does similarly! http://thefurnacereview.com
Red Hen’s Los Angeles Review publishes from the slush pile. They somehow picked me out of there. Thank you, LAR!
If it wasn’t for open submissions, many of us couldn’t even hope to have a chance at a career.
Thanks for the list, Seth.
Indeed I think we need a new term for the ‘slush pile’, because it is not made of slush, but of work and craft and minds and potential greatness.
Great round-up, Seth. I feel and observe the frustration as a writer, but I have a lot of sympathy for the editors even at the big mags. I am sure you know from your experience as an editor some of the not-so-good stuff that can be in the slush pile. So readers have to wade through people who think because they got an A in freshman composition that they are ready for the New Yorker. But on the other hand, there are so many stories in our history of literary greats who were plucked out of the slush pile.
Cool. I sent a story to McSweeney’s straight away! I also want to rate Jeanne Leiby, who added me on Facebook, even though I am a complete nobody. I haven’t sent anything to her yet, but I will. Which brings me to another point, which is the reluctance of many small lit mags to accept electronic submissions. I can kind of understand the attitude. Who wants to spend all day reading poems and stories on back-lit screens? Not me (Steve Jobs, I know you’re reading this). But I am a New Zealand writer who has lived many years in England reading Irish and American literature. I feel ridiculous shaping my submissions according to borders established by 19th century postal services. And, finally, on this, thanks to The Rumpus (and McSweeney’s) for accepting by email.
thanks for this article, seth.
yay for keeping the faith!
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.
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)
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.
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!
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.
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.
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.
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!
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….
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?
Just hard after thousands of hours at work you have to pay for someone to you, which if they like and take to the world they’ll make cash from.The Pile you could say is the same as sieving for gold.Gold is nice and allows you to forget the grit and the mud.
Click here to subscribe today and leave your comment.