Tuesday, September 22, 2009

Editors Vs. Writers

Via PANK, The Review Review as a great post up by Don Lee, former editor of Ploughshares. He’s talking about the animosity that exists between writers and editors. One part that caught my eye:

What makes [editors] dispirited is the us-versus-them mentality that has developed between writers and editors, linked to accusations that they aren’t open to new writers or that the system is somehow rigged … a hard truth: a submission might be good, but not good enough. This is what writers have problems swallowing. After getting a rejection, instead of taking another look at the story or poem and perhaps revising it or spending a little more time thinking about the most suitable venue for it, it’s much easier to rail against these editors
.
Good but not good enough. That’s a tough one for any writer to swallow. Obviously, in any good journal, good work will have to be rejected to make room for the really good work. But, as a lowly submitter, it’s so hard to know where that line is or even what criteria make up that line. It’s not like we sit down to write a story that’s just “good enough”. We try to write great stories. When they get tossed back, it’s hard to know exactly why.

I get the frustration. Hell, I feel the frustration. But what I don’t get is why some writers hate on editors (Lee describes some truly terrible behavior on the part of rejected writers). Sure, as Lee readily admits, some editors are idiots. But most aren’t. If a journal is good, the editors are probably good. And if the journal isn’t good, why do you want your work in there anyway?

No comments:

Post a Comment