Forum / Submitting to print only pubs

• 
  Michael Dickes

  Jul 21, 02:08pm

  Curious what print only publications ya'll consider to be the top five or so to target for short fiction, prose and poems. I have all the lists, but curious to hear the real rub. Thanks.

• 
  Joani Reese

  Jul 21, 08:41pm

  For Poetry? Dreaming big? Poetry Magazine, The Atlantic, The New Yorker, The Kenyon Review

• 
  Michael Dickes

  Jul 21, 10:17pm

  I always think big...as far as dreaming? I am a tenacious sob. "Papa was a pistol - I'm a son of a gun!" :) Thanks JP

• 
  Linda Simoni-Wastila

  Jul 22, 02:04am

  Such a personal question ;^)

  For short fiction, I aspire to journals I love to read -- Bellevue Literary Review, The Sun, Glimmer Train.

  I'll read The Atlantic and The New Yorker, but sometimes the fiction feels too precious for my liking. Peace...

• 
  MaryAnne Kolton

  Jul 22, 03:30am

  I carry the newest issue of Glimmer Train with me always.

• 
  Gill Hoffs

  Jul 22, 07:09am

  PANK [is that print?]seems to be somewhere folk I respect frequently list as a publishing credit, Glimmer Train likewise. Studying this thread with intereast - there are so many places to submit to, I get bamboozled with choice!

• 
  Jim V

  Jul 22, 07:58am

  Top 5? Impossible to come up with, since they seem to change in my estimation almost weekly. Also, I would name 5 different ones for poetry and fiction.

  Anyway, thinking outside the slicks for poetry: Alaska Quarterly Review, Field, Missouri Review, Ploughshares, and Agni.

  If you get in any of them, let me know how you did it.

• 
  Linda Simoni-Wastila

  Jul 22, 10:13am

  Oh yes, Ploughshares for fiction, too. Most def. Peace...

• 
  DeMisty Bellinger

  Jul 22, 04:38pm

  I like: Tin House, Prairie Schooner, Missouri Review, Glimmer Train (who always--ALWAYS--rejects me), and Fence or American Short Fiction. That's six, I know, and the list is ever changing. American Short Fiction has a small reading fee. I'm starting to adore Weave.

  I love The New Yorker, but unless you're Sherman Alexie or Billie Collins, your chances of making it to the final round of "American Idol" may be better. Also, don't really consider The New Yorker a lit journal.

  Here's where Pushcart stories come from: http://perpetualfolly.blogspot.com/2010/11/2011-pushcart-prize-rankings.html

• 
  MaryAnne Kolton

  Jul 22, 04:50pm

  DeMisty, that is a great link - thanks much. I also wanted to add that I find the Poets and Writers LIt Mag site better than Duotrope.

  http://www.pw.org/literary_magazines/fiction?page=2&apage=%2A.&perpage=15

• 
  James Lloyd Davis

  Jul 22, 07:21pm

  We are getting a feel for the 'better' print magazines from this thread ... and we all know the normal channels for submission.

  Does anyone have any clue as to unorthodox means by which an enterprising, underpublished author might get into print at, say the New Yorker or Prairie Schooner?

  I've considered application of modern insurgency and counter-insurgency techniques ... such as covert, long term installation of 'sleeper cells' in the editorial staff of major magazines or even outright extortion. I've even watched every bloody episode of 24 recently, trying to get an idea, but only came away with a few ideas for controlling third world countries through stealth and deceit. Maybe someone knows a less strenuous approach, one that does not require extreme technology or criminal activity ...

  Of course, one could always temporarily steal the identity of Joyce Carol Oates (the possession of which will guarantee publicaion of one's grocery list) or something like that ... or one could even (God protect me from such thoughts) write the very best story anyone has ever read, but there should be something to be done.

  Ideas?

• 
  Michael Dickes

  Jul 22, 09:54pm

  Right on ya'll!

  James - I like your style, man

  I have a growing wall of denials from most print pubs, but beyond knowing someone on staff, or the right agent, I am resolved to be persistent in submitting strong pieces to journals that fit the feel of the story.

• 
  James Lloyd Davis

  Jul 23, 12:17am

  ...sleeper cells, man. Let's get started.

• 
  Cherise Wolas

  Jul 23, 02:50am

  Or we start our own mainstream press! That's a sleeper cell for you!

• 
  James Lloyd Davis

  Jul 23, 03:50am

  I'd be in for a plan like that. Let's do lunch.

• 
  Bill Yarrow

  Jul 23, 05:39am

  Print. Print. Print. What is this obsession? You're just buying into the past. You reach FAR more readers (actual READERS) when you publish online. Yes, there are very good print mags, and there are also very good online mags. There are also horrible print mags and there are horrible online mags. Submit everywhere. I'm not against that. But go for quality.

  I'm in plenty of print magazines. You know what? You NEVER get feedback from a print mag. Online mags? Different story altogether!

  I'm in PANK 4--print mag--five poems. I'm also in last summer's online version of PANK. I was contacted by an editor in Switzerland who saw the online issue and was interested in reprinting one of my pieces. That was because the online version had a wider audience. The era of print magazine cachet is OVER!

  The New Yorker is a wonderful magazine and they publish wonderful writers, but they don't publish ALL the wonderful writers. Neither does Poetry. ETC.

  Thinking print superior to online publishing--that's just--IMHO--snobby. Unkind also to a lot of people (many on Fictionaut) who are trying to produce quality online magazines. WHEREVER it appears, good writing is good writing.

  Don't hoard your masterpiece. Get it out there.

• 
  Bill Yarrow

  Jul 23, 06:09am

  "Don't hoard your masterpiece."
  I think I meant pigeonhole.

  Well, whatever the word I meant, the idea was don't compartmentalize your work and think certain pieces are "print worthy" while others are only "online worthy." In other words, don't discriminate. Be thankful and proud wherever your work appears.

• 
  David Ackley

  Jul 23, 01:15pm

  I was going to compose a screed listing all the ways online magazines have an edge on print mags, but Bill said it first and better.

  I'd only add that in my limited experience, online magazines are very much quicker in responding--a big thing for me-- and that the editors are as competent and a lot more giving.

  This comes from an old print guy who's edited 3 print journals.

• 
  Michael Dickes

  Jul 23, 03:29pm

  I'll preface this by stating that, yes there are some fine on-line zines, some by f'nauts who are very talented and work very hard to create something of quality.

  I respect everyone's opinion. Here's the rub though, from my perspective:

  I can remember the first book I read as a kid that captivated me. It went everywhere with me. I held it, accidentally dropped it, picked it up and put it in my backpack for safekeeping. I bent the corners back of pages to mark my place. I stared at the cover, the binding, the shadow in its gutter, the author notes, the publishing and (c) info.

  Matt Dennison and I once chatted about how we would put in the effort to venture out to the book store to purchase a prized possession and held it in our hands, took it everywhere we went, and never forgot how it affected us on a very deep level.

  I love the smell of libraries, of book stores, of pages bent and colored by time, coffee cups, juice stains, sneezes. (ya, i know).

  The act of reading is a spiritual experience that goes beyond simply reading and absorbing the material.

  I have yet to have someone tell me how much they enjoyed a story (not mine) on line.

  Maybe I'm old school. Yes, I am old school. Too many things have been lost in translation.

  I am grateful for the pieces of mine that have been published in any form.

  Just my personal point of view on the matter, Bill.

• 
  Bill Yarrow

  Jul 23, 04:08pm

  Yes, there's a lot of nostalgia associated with the act of reading a physical book. The world's changing, Michael. That's exciting and sad at the same time.

• 
  Joani Reese

  Jul 23, 04:49pm

  The desire to see one's work in print and to hold it in one's hands does not negate the appreciation a writer has for online venues. I work without pay for THIS, an online venue I respect, and I will soon do the same at another online venue. The fact that I would consider a publication in Poetry Magazine the pinnacle of my writing life does not negate my pride and gratitude in having my work published online. There are many fine places online to support writers and more every day, for which I am grateful.

  Perhaps, like Michael and Matt, I am old school, but I am not blind to the fact that the writing world is rapidly changing, and I'm not upset that perhaps soon online publication and print will share equally in the prestige afforded to writers when their work is published in either framework. As a matter of fact, I look forward to it. Until that time, however, to be a poet whose work graces the pages of Poetry is to me the ultimate affirmation of one's standing as a master of both the art and craft of poetry.

• 
  James Lloyd Davis

  Jul 23, 05:43pm

  Me <<< not sayin' nothin' at all. Missin' ol' Matt Dennison for sure.

• 
  MaryAnne Kolton

  Jul 23, 05:58pm

  Joanie, you said pretty much what I wanted to
  say. To be published in Glimmer Train would be heart stopping for me. I also see the trend toward online. In fact, many of the print magazines I submit to, now have BOTH a print edition and an online edition. I can absolutely see both sides of this discussion.

  I will always love the smell, feel and heft of a new book, but the future is here. Print only magazines cannot, for the most part, afford to stay in business. Remember Story? Linda and Susan at Glimmer Train have been using their own money for twenty years and have yet to break even, let alone made a profit. Onlines are just a click away and have the ability to let the whole world take a look at our work.

• 
  David Ackley

  Jul 23, 09:33pm

  An interesting thing happened recently when TriQuarterly went to an online version and in the transition fired its editorial staff, to be replaced by graduate students. Outrage, perhaps somewhat justified, followed from the world of literary presses along with predictions that the fall from grace would be followed by loss of readership and general decline, including by the editor of the Pushcart Prize volume. But I note that the now wholely online version still ranks high among literary magazines, and in looking at the result appears to engender just as much interest and respect from writers, at least judging by the caliber of those published such as William Gass.

• 
  Cherise Wolas

  Jul 23, 10:57pm

  I think in part one needs to determine the purpose behind publication: to be published, to create a following, to demonstrate to an established literary agent that your material is marketable, to interest a publisher (and I mean a large one for the purpose of this post). Despite the changing world of increased online journals, most are not considered substantial enough to merit notice by established literary agents and large commercial publishers. If the goal is to go mainstream writer, to have an established and connected agent, and to publish books with large publishers, then print publications are far more important, still, for now, more important.

• 
  Linda Simoni-Wastila

  Jul 24, 01:39am

  I think Cherise raises an excellent point -- what reason for publication?

  Most of my work gets pubbed online, and I choose that medium because I want the audience (and yes, far more reaction from readers from online than print). I don't even try to place most of my work in print venues -- I want the audience for these stories and poems.

  But there are a few works I 'hoard' (I think it IS the appropriate word, Bill) for print, in hopes these pieces are good enough to land in a 2nd or even 1st tier print journal. I send them out every few months, wait the requisite time, get them rejected, then try again. My ultimate goal is to obtain and agent and/or editor for my novels; one way to gain their attention is through print pubs in the Glimmer Trains of our field.

  I've had six print pubs (not including anthologies) and while the thrill of reading my words while holding the journal in my hands is difficult to convey, the lack of a reaction once I close the journal remains bittersweet. Peace...

• 
  Susan Tepper

  Jul 24, 07:13pm

  When I started submitting (in the stone age) there was only print. So it was an ungodly nightmare of rejections and a few acceptances here and there, till you got known to the editors of certain mags by repeat submissions.

  These days I send everywhere that I respect the work they publish (at least most of what they publish). Maybe the online audience is bigger. I don't know. I think many writers just check out their own piece in the print mag or online and move along.

  At least here on f'naut, you are actually being read!! by a vast number of people, and isn't that what we all want, essentially, to be read.

• 
  Michael Dickes

  Jul 24, 08:23pm

  Lots of good input here. We all travel unique journeys towards the destinations of our choosing (or at least of our creation).

  I am only familiar with a small scattering of on-line zines. Most, nearly all really, seem to be populated and consumed only by other writers.

  Any suggestions on opportunities with e-zines popular with readers that aren't writers?

  Cool beans, ya'll

• 
  Susan Tepper

  Jul 24, 08:29pm

  Hmmm.... ezines popular with readers who aren't writers?
  Kind of like Mars without Martians...
  Sorry, Mike, I couldn't resist, my little joke..

• 
  Jim V

  Jul 26, 12:04pm

  I have a lot to say about this print v. online business, but it would only piss some people off, so I'll refrain.

  I will say I agree entirely when Bill says you should get your work out there.

• 
  Michael Dickes

  Jul 26, 01:07pm

  James,

  It is my opinion that you should feel free to speak your opinion freely. The point in these types of discussions, at least for me, is to communicate, share, and sometimes debate ideas. That being said, no need to be rude...not saying that would be your intention, but sometimes my responses come off that way, which is never my intention.

  All I know is that the input here has caused me to re-examine my own view of the issue.

  Cherise stated a wise look at the reality of print vs. online. I still maintain that I would prefer print every time and for many reasons, but Bill Y. makes a good point and one that is obviously staring us in the face every single day - online publishing will not be denied nor ignored and must be embraced as the new platform that has led to newer platforms and to the next.

  The good folks that have put a lot of effort into creating quality on line pubs should be applauded and supported. Now: How do we draw a larger percentage of the general public to read them? (If that is your target audience).

  I will follow the path of least resistance if it means that my work will be read by MY target audience, but I ain't giving up on print without a dog down and dirty fight.

  Meow woof growl lick

• 
  W.F. Lantry

  Jul 26, 04:26pm

  "Does anyone have any clue as to unorthodox means by which an enterprising, underpublished author might get into print at, say the New Yorker or Prairie Schooner?"

  Does anyone honestly think that anything coming out of the slushpile gets into these magazines? Back in the 50's, the new yorker had a rule that one piece a month had to come from slush, but it's been a long time since then. The same thing goes for many of the other mags mentioned, and Poetry is the biggest offender of all. These days, publication in those places has nothing to do with merit, and everything to do with cultural identification, relationships, etc. And why not? Their editors are human, and subject to the same pressures all of us experience.

  The real flaw here is in our assumptions. Do you want readers, or are you chasing after some long extinct notion of prestige and priority? Here's reality: publish in a print journal, and your piece will sit on the shelves or in boxes, unread. Online, the same piece will get literally thousands of readers. Anyone who wants to resist this idea may as well become like CuChulain, after he'd gone mad. Take your sword, go out and fight the waves as they come onshore. See if you can hold them back. Let me know if they obey your will! ;)

  Thanks,

  Bill

• 
  Susan Tepper

  Jul 26, 04:40pm

  Bill, that's what I've learned to about NYer, etc. It's a closed shop. Agents with hot books about to be published sit down with NYer editors at lunches and pitch their clients books, which get whittled into
  "excerpts". The rest that get published are part ot the NYer "stable of writers." I know two writers and one poet who made it into the NYer in the 90's without "prior representation." All that halted when Tina whats-her-name took over the magazine. It's all about showing off big name authors to sell magazines. Period. Just like commerical publishing has become a totally bottom line business.
  Anyone who wishes to refute what I'm writing here may feel free to do so, but what I'm saying has come from some top literary agents who don't b.s. when they talk shop.

• 
  Bobbi Lurie

  Jul 26, 05:12pm

  James, please don't be afraid of pissing people off--when an opinion is strong or controversial, that is when things get interesting.

• 
  David Ackley

  Jul 26, 06:43pm

  Susan's points about the New Yorker's self-serving commitment to the biggest name writers is underlined by the recent selection of "Forty under 30" (could be I got the number wrong)all younger writers who were on the verge of making the big-time in the New Yorker's estimation. This was a little like the Yankees hyping the talent on their own triple-A farm team. I get it: Stars of the Future! Soon to be seen in the New Yorker!

• 
  Jim V

  Jul 26, 10:06pm

  Okay, the truth. I hope nobody gets offended, but this is the internet, and someone always gets offended...

  First of all, let me state this. It's not in my best interests to convince people that print is superior to online publishing. Every time a brilliant writer like Bill Yarrow takes himself out of the print gene pool, I move up a spot, and so the best thing for me to do would be to shut my trap and let people wash themselves out. But that wouldn't be very sporting of me, so...

  Let me start with a question. What are the names of the swarm of writers who have achieved large success by publishing exclusively online? And by large success I don't mean the best seller's list. I mean, won NEA grants or a major award or have books with large publishers or whatever. Name some. Can you?

  I know we can both give the names of many writers, both old and young, who ignore online publishing entirely, and more who publish online only very rarely, and have had huge success in the larger publishing world. But where are the corresponding online writers?

  Print publication remains the standard. Period. There are good reasons for this. 1) These journals have been around forever and have a rich literary tradition that no online journal has. 2) They are often attached to universities, giving them still further prestige. (Some online journals also have this, like Valpo Poetry, Front Porch, and Failbetter, and have a larger cache because of it also, but still not the cache as university print.) 3) Because they are in book form, people consider it "real" publication, while online journals are seen as merely "blogs", something amateurs do in their pajamas. (Dan Rather famously said bloggers were a bunch of loser writing in their pajamas.) 4) The best writers publish mainly in print. How often do you see Joyce Carol Oates or Billy Collins publish online? It happens, but only rarely. That means that there's a disparity in the competition that everyone knows about. Publishing online does not mean that you couldn't have published the work in print, but the idea is there-- and sometimes it's accurate. Especially since the number of new journals started is roughly 32 a day.

  There are a bunch of other reasons, but here's the cold hard result. The landscape isn't changing much, except that because many of the amateurs/beginners/impatient emerging writers are ditching print for online venues, (mainly because it's easier, as is stated again and again, as if that's something one should be proud of), they are taking with them many of the funds that kept the print venues alive, meaning there are less independent journals like Rattle that really give beginners a shot and more slicks like the New Yorker and university-sponsored journals that often do not give beginners amd emerging writers a real chance. This makes it tougher, not easier, for the writer to break through into where it really matters, since there is no place left for him to go but the ghetto, which his how those "print snobs" see online puiblishing.

  Meaning if the situation that the slicker print journals are not publishing newcomers is true, it is being caused by the very people who have abandoned print because their unfounded cynicism has led to a self-fulfilled prophesy. If such people are not buying print journals, the journals must sell "name" writers instead to survive.

  Many of the other arguments in favor of the online journal remain in error.

  Theory: Online work is read more. Fact: There is no proof of this. Mostly this seems to me misinterpreting data, anecdotal, or simply wishful thinking. There is no reason to believe that a piece that is put online for free will be read than a piece someone pays money to get. It is certainly less likely to be read by those in position of literary power. I have also heard online editors complain that their submission page gets many more hits than all their other pages put together. I always hate when online people compare hits to "readers." They are not one and the same. You guys know this from your own actions. Do you read everything you click on? No? Me neither.

  Besides, if it came right down to it, if number of readers was all that mattered, I could start a blog tomorrow and have a bigger readership than I get here on Fictionaut and in most of my online credits. Day 1. That's just the way it is. And if I made the blog about Justin Timberlake, I could get more readers than all of you combined-- or at least hits.

  Further, if there is more feedback about online work, then perhaps that has something to do with the fact that an email link is simply an easier way of communicating than is sending a postal letter or hunting down a print author's email.

  Nevertheless, I have gotten tons of letters for my print work. I get them all the time, in fact, since I've published a lot in print. I even get them for stuff I wrote years and years ago. People who read something I wrote in 1994 hunt me down on Facebook-- because they remember a poem I wrote all those years ago. I agree with Bill there. Good work is good work. So why should the online venue be a *better* platform for feedback, other than accessibility.

  Online, there is also always the onward push, a kind of what-have-you-done lately vibe where a piece is old news the minute it falls off the front page at Fictionaut. That's what you want for your work? Look at your old Fictionaut stories/poems. You get a lot of comments and faves on them?

  Here's another clue for you. Go to any contributor note and see what they list. Here's a bio note for the editor of Anti. You would think that the editor of a very well thought of online journal would be listing journal after journal of online credits. Instead we get this:

  "His poetry is available or forthcoming from New England Review, Pleiades, Verse, The Journal, Indiana Review, Beloit Poetry Journal, Barrow Street, The Laurel Review, Copper Nickel, Fourteen Hills, Court Green, The National Poetry Review (where he won the Laureate Prize), Cimarron Review, The Southeast Review, 32 Poems, Barn Owl Review, diode, Front Porch, and Verse Daily (x3)."

  By my count he lists 16 print journals before he lists even one online journal. Then only names three online venues, one of which isn't even a journal but a kind of anthology/award site. So of the 18 journals, only 2 are online.

  This is not unusual. In fact, it's the norm. If you have print publications, you put them front and center, since everyone knows with few exceptions they are superior to online credits, or at least are perceived that way.

  Notice also the names of the mags. No New Yorker, no Atlantic Monthly. These journals are not now and never were the heart of the print world. They're great to get into, but few ever have. It doesn't matter if they take any stuff from the slush pile. No one or five journals controls the entrance anymore, if they ever did. A perfectly fine career can be had never getting inside the New Yorker once. That said, I have published work in Arts & Letters, Crab Creek Review, Hanging Loose, River Styx, and other journals that Duotrope lists as taking either no unsolicited work or very close to none. Hell, Prairie Schooner takes almost 3% or its poetry submissions. I have a couple of dozen credits that take less. And I'm nobody-- certainly not part of the New York Scene. My middle name is Slush.

  Then there comes the little matter of pay. In the old days, we used to put up with not getting cash money because we understood that a print journal incurred big expenses. He had to print the thing and pay for postage. It usually came out of the editor's pocket and so we knew that a copy was all we could get. Nevertheless, it kept us connected, gave us reading material we wouldn't have gotten otherwise, and sometimes even gave us a collector's item. (I have print journals from the old days I could sell today for hundreds of dollars on eBay.)

  What does an online writer get for his trouble?

  Exposure. That's it. Despite the fact that the editor no longer has such heavy expenses and despite the fact the writer gets no contributor copies, he nevertheless is (almost always) still not paid cash money. In other words, the writer has managed to become even less valued with the advent of the online journal. Now he's not even worth the price of a staple and a stamp.

  Well, that's all fine and good if the online exposure alone led somewhere. But again-- who are the exclusively online writers who have landed a bigtime grant or contract? How common is that?

  Of course, there's also a downside to exposure. It's like your mother used to tell you girls. If he can get the milk for free, why buy the cow? Well, if you can get the poems/stories online, why buy the book?

  I could go on, but I'll stop here. My interest is not to poo poo online journals, their editors, or the writers who publish in them. Hell, *I* publish in them, and am happy to do so, since I consider my poetry and short fiction to be a fun side gig-- and the novels I'm working on to be the crux of the matter. And I think the world of many of the people who edit or write for online journals. But no one should be fooled into thinking that online journals are *superior* to print-- or that a writer can succeed beyond a certain point with them alone.

  I am lucky to be able to write enough that I can publish in a great many journals, in print and online. But if I had to choose just one venue, well, I'd rather put my writing up against the best of the best. And right now, and probably for some time to come, that means print.

• 
  Jim V

  Jul 26, 10:17pm

  Wow, that was long. Sorry. You can get a bit carried away writing in this box. :)

• 
  James Lloyd Davis

  Jul 26, 11:40pm

  Does anyone know of any studies that have been done recently to assess the readership of journals? Online, print ...

  Would love to have a better grip on the marketing aspects that seem to elude most of us. Information would be a proprietary resource for people in the publishing business, but it's something any writer should consider since he or she is executing the first line of all marketing efforts for creative writing with submissions.

  I've been doing research lately into the printing and publishing business, but marketing is something I'd like to look at, if for no other reason that to have a better notion of the opportunities and possibilities that arise in concert with new technologies and media.

  Note: I use the term 'marketing' as merely an arbitrary point of reference. I know how sensitive people can be about the idea of equating the writing arts with 'product.' Won't beat that pony here again. I promise.

• 
  Thomas Pluck

  Jul 27, 01:23am

  I am also eager to be in print- I sent my best to Crimespree and Needle: A Magazine of Noir, and I always hit Ellery Queen first with my noir or crime stories- but the online mags should not be overlooked.
  For one, there are more of them, and they often have a specific tone they like, so it can be easier to target your story to the proper market.
  Two, Even when an online mag goes defunct, they usually leave the stories up in an archive. You will get readers long after it appears.
  Three, feedback. I got reprinted in The Utne Reader and I have no idea how many subscribers they have. I know how many people "liked" the article on Facebook on their website and at The Morning News, where it first appeared.
  Four, readership. More people are reading online.

  It's similar to the e-book argument. Of course, I've always dreamed of writing a BOOK. A hardcover. I still do. But I know many authors, new and established, and they both sell more electronic now. Unless you're Lee Child or Joyce Carol Oates or Stephen King or Janet Evanovich.

  Another perk of being online? Mystery Grand Master Lawrence Block commented on one of my stories. Sure, Margaret Atwood might read you in the Atlantic. But if she reads you in an online venue, she might let you know she liked it (she's vocal on twitter, I'm not sure if she is big on commenting on online fiction).

• 
  James Lloyd Davis

  Jul 27, 01:44am

  Who's Margaret Atwood? (Just kidding)

• 
  MaryAnne Kolton

  Jul 27, 02:36am

  I have a feeling, and it's just that, a feeling that online work is more about writers reading other writers.

  I can't believe I'm actually agreeing with Jim Valvis, but I think the "cachet" of print plus the pay, plus readership is still more important in the literary world.

  There are some writers on FN who do brilliant work and I always look forward to reading it.
  Can they honestly say they have made more profitable or meaningful contacts here or online than they have by appearing in print? I'm asking that question seriously as I don't know the answer.

  Tom, are you talking about the Lawrence Block who wrote the Seven Deadly Sins series? He's got to be at least one hundred and ten years old!

• 
  kate hill cantrill

  Jul 27, 02:46am

  In 1995 my tech savvy sister said, "Choose your writer name, stick with it and publish online so people will actually read it."

  I think it's not much of a discussion at this point because most online pubs also make yearly anthologies in print, so you get the best of both worlds.

  Of course if you google my name without quotation marks, you're going to come up with a old racing horse and not me...so there are some drawbacks to the google.

• 
  Jim V

  Jul 27, 05:38am

  MaryAnne, what's so hard about agreeing with me? Why should that be something you can't believe?

• 
  W.F. Lantry

  Jul 27, 10:18am

  And now, just to lighten the tone a little, a brief respite: http://lifehacker.com/5811255/why-you-cant-win-an-argument-on-the-internet

  Thanks,

  Bill

• 
  David Ackley

  Jul 27, 01:24pm

  The print medium has existed for 600 years, journals since the 18th century, online journals for what 10, 15 years? Significantly, maybe half that or less. The very fact that we're having this discussion shows how quickly online publishing has gained. If you look ahead rather than in the rearview mirror, and taking into account how many print journals have gone online in part or wholly,a reasonable prediction is that online publishing will be the dominant medium for literary work in the near future.

• 
  Jim V

  Jul 27, 02:04pm

  Shakespeare has existed for 400 years, novels since the 18th century, Manga for what 10, 15 years? Significantly, maybe half that or less. The very fact that we're having this discussion shows how quickly comic books have gained. If you look ahead rather than in the rearview mirror, and taking into account how many novels have become "graphic" in part or whole, a reasonable prediction is that Pokemon will be the dominant literary work in the near future.

• 
  James Lloyd Davis

  Jul 27, 02:33pm

  It is not a reasonable prediction that Pokemon will be the dominant literary work in the near future.

• 
  Jim V

  Jul 27, 03:06pm

  You're right, JLD. It's not. Because something sees a sudden growth in popularity does not 1) mean it will continue to rise in popularity, 2) make obsolete or render to second class status what came before, and/or 3) be a good thing overall if it continues to gain in popularity.

  It does typically mean, for better or worse, it's here to stay. That should be taken into account. But nobody should be fooled into thinking the old ways are dead.

  Because the old ways always die hard.

• 
  James Lloyd Davis

  Jul 27, 03:28pm

  No, they do not. Sometimes, they die very quickly. I once had a highly skilled and specialized trade that was entirely supplanted by computers and robotic machines. Entirely supplanted. And it happened within five years.

  Old ways sometimes disappear very quickly, but argument about which media will survive and which will become obsolescent are pretty much moot. The question people should ask is "What is relevant to me as a writer today." Not tomorrow. Not yesterday. Today.

  The answer lies with both media.

• 
  James Lloyd Davis

  Jul 27, 03:30pm

  By the way, that skill? It took hundreds of years to develop. Generations.

• 
  James Lloyd Davis

  Jul 27, 03:31pm

  Gone in five years.

• 
  James Lloyd Davis

  Jul 27, 03:32pm

  There's a lesson there. What did I do? I learned how to use the computers.

• 
  Bobbi Lurie

  Jul 27, 04:41pm

  I find it strange that it seems that few people like what's in ie; Poetry yet everyone wants to be in it. (myself included, even though I rarely try)

  I am currently ridding myself of books which are no longer important to me. This is an interesting task because I learn which books, authors' work I truly value.

  I am also ridding myself of literary print journals, including the ones where my work has been included. (books have taken over my living space and I am tired of the dust and the dusting and the accumulation of things I do not use on a daily or weekly or monthly or yearly or bi-yearly basis.

  I find myself repelled by the idea of receiving yet more hard copy print journals. this is a major reason why i no longer submit to them.

  When I read that something is just in print copy, I don't enter. Pushcart prizes etc. really don't mean anything to me: they just put you in another anthology and give you another self-pronounced accolade for your resume. What matters is the work and that it is out there, I think. (my view only--obviously)

• 
  Bobbi Lurie

  Jul 27, 04:51pm

  Dear James,

  I just read your post in favor of print journals. I absolutely understand what you are saying.

  I think it is a matter of what kind of writer you are. My work is more experimental and I don't fit in those places, nor do I want to, nor do I feel that particular literary world is the only one. If it were, I wouldn't be writing.

  Re: "famous" writers: I rarely read their work. I seek out more experimental writers and poets and artists and / or people I have never heard of. I never find them in bookstores and rarely in art galleries. But they are on the internet.

  I don't care about my "fate" as a writer. Or, if I do, it wouldn't be from the traditional print publications you mention above. I just know I NEED to write and it is too easy to lose the desire.

  Re: money: this is an expensive habit.

  Bobbi

• 
  David Ackley

  Jul 27, 05:49pm

  Snarky parodies notwithstanding, fallacies in reasoning are of two kinds; logical and factual. Because I didn't bother to state the obvious facts underlying the prediction that online or e-publishing will shortly be the dominant form, Jim Valvis chose to parody merely the logic, and ignored the factual basis.

  Item: One of the oldest and best established literary magazines, Triquarterly goes to an entirely electronic version.

  Item: Most major publishing houses are desperately exploring e-publishing alternatives.

  Item: Amazon reports that sales of e-books are the fastest growing segment of its business and have now exceeded 50% of sales.

  Item: Borders declares Chapter 11 leaving a single major chain of bookstores.

  I should note that this is merely a sampling of the evidence of an obvious and overwhelming trend toward electronic publishing that will affect every aspect of the trade . What underlies it is the desires of readership: even readers of literary fiction in whatever form, books or journals, will before long expect it to available in electronic media.

  I didn't say this will eliminate the traditional print media and in fact I hope and expect it won't . I love books too. But it's hard to look at the facts and the trends and quarrel the conclusion that e-forms will dominate over their print counterparts.

• 
  James Lloyd Davis

  Jul 27, 06:07pm

  It would be interesting to do a comparative study of media and the numbers that relate to their usage. Even that would be insufficient, since it should be carried into the study of corresponding trends.

  For my purpose, that's the next step in my research ... as it pertains to creative writers, not necessaily the industry, which by the way, should be dominated and usurped to the advantage of the producers of literary work, but that's another story and something that has been broached on the forums before.

  As I come across information that may be useful or interesting, I'll post it on the boards here.

  Writers could benefit from the old Marine Corps adage, "Improvise, adapt, overcome."

  It couldn't hurt.

• 
  Jim V

  Jul 27, 06:16pm

  It's very easy to see how facts can be miscontrued.

  Item: One of the oldest and best established literary magazines, Triquarterly goes to an entirely electronic version.

  Response: Triquarterly is getting a lot of milage here-- because there are not many examples of formerly major print literary zines going online. In fact, I can't think of any others. There may be, but of the highly respected literary zines very few have run to become online. Most of them realize that such a change will entail a significant drop in prestige.

  Item: Most major publishing houses are desperately exploring e-publishing alternatives.

  Desperately is an interesting word. It's not one I would use, since it indicates an unfounded and unproved bias, but I suppose, yes, publishing houses are exploring e-publishing. Why shouldn't they? Nobody's saying e-publishing will not have any place in the publishing world-- just that it will overnight overthrow print.

  Item: Amazon reports that sales of e-books are the fastest growing segment of its business and have now exceeded 50% of sales.

  Of course they're the fastest growing. When you're starting from zero, you're going to grow faster than others. Like saying my kid is the fastest growing person in the house.

  It will be interesting to see if they can maintain that kind of sales rate-- or if when people's Kindles get filled up with a bunch of stuff people haven't read, the bottom falls out.

  Item: Borders declares Chapter 11 leaving a single major chain of bookstores.

  This proves not a thing. Instead, it talks about the changes in how we *buy* books, not what kind of books they are.

• 
  MaryAnne Kolton

  Jul 27, 06:53pm

  James, since you asked, I find it hard to agree with you on any issues for several reasons. First, you seem to start more fights here than anyone else. Second you brought your last fight with Susan Tepper to a personal level that I found really embarrassing for you both and last, you can't let go. You must always have the last word.

  I think your work here is amazing. And I thought your original presentation of your opinion in this case was fairly correct. So I can only assume that you just enjoy fighting with people. And that's why I am hesitant to admit I agree with you about anything.

• 
  James Lloyd Davis

  Jul 27, 06:59pm

  Amazing how quickly a discussion can turn into a debate here. You can learn from discussions. All you get from a debate is rhetoric.

• 
  David Ackley

  Jul 27, 07:03pm

  By its nature, predicting the future is what they used to call a "mugs' game," and to defer any umbrage, I include myself among said mugs who can't resist taking a shot. At least this time, Jim, you addressed the evidence I offered, such as it was. I'd only add, as I'm sure you're perfectly aware that what I offered in evidence was only a small sampling of what I've casually read over the last year, but which sheer laziness precludes looking up. Frankly, I hope you're right and I'm wrong, but I'm afraid that hope doesn't turn many tides.

• 
  MaryAnne Kolton

  Jul 27, 07:05pm

  Just a quick PS

  http://perpetualfolly.blogspot.com/2010/11/2011-pushcart-prize-rankings.html

  Notice that this article about where most Pushcart stories come from states

  "Online magazines are more evident this year — notably Narrative, but there are several others on the list, as well. Kenyon Review is represented by both its print and online components, although I’ve combined them here."

• 
  David Ackley

  Jul 27, 07:06pm

  To allay any confusion, the "Jim" in my above posting is addressed to Jim Valvis.

• 
  James Lloyd Davis

  Jul 27, 07:11pm

  < Not confused, but thanks, David.

• 
  MaryAnne Kolton

  Jul 27, 07:11pm

  Just a quick note

  http://perpetualfolly.blogspot.com/2010/11/2011-pushcart-prize-rankings.html

  when referencing where most of the Pushcart stories come from this very interesting piece states:

  "Online magazines are more evident this year —notably Narrative, but there are several others on the list, as well. Kenyon Review is represented by both its print and online components, although I’ve combined them here."

• 
  Jim V

  Jul 27, 07:11pm

  MaryAnne, I have gotten into exactly one, count them, one fight here.

  I'm not fighting in this thread, just debating and defending my points.

  And why shouldn't I have the last word? Somebody has to have it. If you go back to the beginning of the thread, I was reluctant to even offer an opinion... Mainly because I get a lot of nasty comments about my person as a thank you.

  Speaking of which, I don't remember ever saying one mean word about you, but you don't seem to have any problem making them about me, do you?

• 
  James Lloyd Davis

  Jul 27, 07:13pm

  Hopefully, no one is going to say a mean word about my wife, MaryAnne Kolton. That would be unfortunate.

• 
  Jim V

  Jul 27, 07:16pm

  "Frankly, I hope you're right and I'm wrong,"

  Fair enough, David. I hope you'll hedge your bets and not shut yourself off from publishing in print, given the opportunity. Obviously I've given this a lot of thought. I still think a person who wants to succeed in the field of writing cannot afford to overlook print.

• 
  MaryAnne Kolton

  Jul 27, 07:16pm

  Nope, I call 'em like I see 'em. Try to remember I agreed, for the most part, with your original position here and I still think you are a gifted and talented writer. . .

• 
  Jim V

  Jul 27, 07:27pm

  Ah, you call em like you see em by insulting me, and I get into "fights" by debating with them.

  Well, okay then...

• 
  MaryAnne Kolton

  Jul 27, 07:39pm

  Jim V. You asked why I would be hesitant to align myself with you and I answered honestly, however in an effort to be fair as I read back over this entire thread - yawn - I see now that in this thread you are NOT fighting and are defending your position in a mostly reasonable fashion. I apologize for infering that you were fighting again

• 
  Jim V

  Jul 27, 07:53pm

  Well, it's okay, MaryAnne. Forget it. I think that former thread may have given me an underserved rep. I'm usually easy to get along with, as most of my Facebook friends will tell you, though I have strong opinions. I rarely put them out there, though, because I believe most people have already made up their minds anyway, but when I do I try my best to explain why I believe what I believe.

  Thanks for calling me a gifted writer. That was nice of you.

• 
  Michael Dickes

  Jul 28, 12:16am

  HEEEYYY!!! OK, OK, Ok, ok………keep going…

  Ooh look, a bunny!

• 
  MaryAnne Kolton

  Jul 28, 01:56am

  Michael, here is a new list of the Top Twenty Online Literary Magazine sites - per EVR. Go for it!

• 
  MaryAnne Kolton

  Jul 28, 02:36am

  http://www.everywritersresource.com/bestonlineliterarymagazines.html

  Okay then, here it is. . .

• You must log in to reply to this thread.