I hasten to add:

Roy Kesey got a BASS nod from Stephen King, and
Jim Ruland is the recipient of an NEA Fellowship.

Ahem…

Now I’m done.

Plus, the Zoetrope workshop is totally free.
I can honestly say that Zoetrope Studios helped
me to improve my writing.

It’s also helped writers such as Chimamanda
Ngozie Adichie, Roy Kesey, Jim Ruland, Pia Z.
Erhardt, Lisa McMann and Kim Chinquee.

These writers, respectively, have topped the
N.Y. Times Bestseller List, won a Pushcart Prize,
the Narrative Prize, and an Orange Prize.

Definitely not “small potatoes.”

I’m a member of Zoetrope Studios, and I get rejected
all the time, from magazine editors who are also Zoetrope Studio members. I’ve been rejected multiple times by Opium Magazine, Night Train, Vestal Review, Smokelong Quarterly,
Pindeldyboz, Hobart, Mad Hatter’s Review, and Word Riot, just to name a few.

Rejection comes with the territory of writing and publishing. And yes, I have been guilty of thinking
“bad thoughts” about editors who have rejected my work.

But I’m getting way too old to make a pattern out of
that perspective. Persistence is a better template.

Plus patience, but everybody already knows this.

Bottom line: I’m always surprised when anybody
wishes to publish my stuff. And that goes for whether
the editor in question is an absolute stranger, or
someone I’ve worked with countless times before.

Okay then. Enough preachin’ to the choir.

Carry on, good people!

–DM

About Duotrope: Their statistics are based on numbers compiled from members of Duotrope. Those percentages are not based on all submitters. So Duotrope’s numbers are not accurate, and it’s risky to use those numbers to make a case in an argument.

Also, the reason that FRiGG runs a large number of writers from Zoetrope is that we get a disproportionately large number of submittals from Zoetrope writers. And I frequently look at the work posted at Zoetrope. I openly admit this–and I would advise any writer who is interested in getting his or her work in front of editors (and other writers) to join Zoetrope and participate seriously there. There are many, many benefits to doing so–perhaps chief among them being the dramatic improvements in one’s writing that can happen via the process of posting writing, getting feedback on it (often from very skilled writers), and learning how to revise and refine. Also, you can evaluate the writing of hundreds of other writers and learn from it. You can meet and “talk shop” with editors and many other writers. You’ll learn about markets for your fiction. Anyone from any background, any race, any religion, from anywhere in the world, can join Zoetrope. It is not a closed forum. It’s a huge place, and its members tend to be quite savvy about online venues for fiction and poetry. Many members of Zeotrope are actively submitting their work to many magazines. In fact, as I believe has been pointed out, pick any online lit mag and you’ll see Zoetropers represented there–sometimes a lot of them. Why is this? It’s because there are so many Zoetropers submitting work! And many of them are quite good writers (in many cases, they’ve gotten good because they’ve spent years workshopping their work at Zoetrope). Now, there are other ways to improve one’s fiction writing skills–but Zoetrope is a darn good way. It’s absolutely free of charge and you can participate according to your own schedule, for as short or as long a time as you want to.

I daresay that many of the best fiction writers whose work we currently see at various online and print venues are, or have been, members of Zoetrope. I believe these numbers will continue to grow as the years pass–if Mr. Coppola and his cohorts are good enough to keep offering the Virtual Studio as a gathering place for writers.

So, yeah, a lot of writers whose work appears in online magazines are members of Zoetrope. That’s because there are a lot of these writers and many of them are very good. Is Zoetrope a “club”? I dunno if it’s a “club”–but if it is, it sure as hell ain’t exclusive.

But enough arguing!! I think we’ll just have to agree to disagree on this one.

Oh wait, I know where this is going. You’re going to tell me that there’s THOUSANDS of places to publish short stories. Yes, technically, yes — but almost ZERO places for writers who (a) want to get paid (ie, writing is their job) and (b) want to be read. Almost all of the stupid “literary journals” pay zero, or practically zero, and are only read by nerdy English department wonks. And the kind of stories they publish reflect that. It’s a sick joke.

I enjoy my relationships with editors. If it were not for a few editors that have appreciated my work I would likely not be writing. In the least, I would not be publishing. I rarely submit to any publication where I do not know the editor, or am not curious to know the editor better. That is me. I am never too sure if they like me, or not. But if they accept anything less than my best attempt at writing then I consider it a fault of lack of mutual respect. I like when editors respect me enough to say, “No, not this one, not this time.”

I have a busy life with my own directions and Zoetrope happens to be about the only opportunity I have to interface with writers, or editors. Most of the folks that I know and write for don’t read much, and find me a curiosity for the fact that I write at all. I have come to some fine relationships with editors through Zoetrope. I don’t really give a damn how any other writers, rejected or accepted, feel about that.

I have an upcoming re-publication of a story that I care about, that I hope is a good story, that I have an emotional investment in (please do not take my sense of worth away from me with an implication that I cheated on the writing) and lest I be suddenly skewed into a Zoetrope statistic the editor DID NOT this time around solicit the piece, and had in fact been turned down when the piece was years ago solicited. Writers, at least this one, reject editors from time to time. We try to do it gently and without a form letter. That care and respect in time leads to a relationship. As I see it, editors need to know writers if they hope to get any good work to publish.

There are a whole lot of writers that write shit and will never do anything more than write shit. They can bludgeon the editors but it won’t make much difference in the result. Shit is shit.

Literary Rejections on Display comes across to me as an archetype of disgruntled crankass that I have seen gassing on about rejections and the cabal of editors and writers for nearly a half century. It comes across as tedious, it is a drag, and it removes the joy of play. What else is there but he joy of play? If there was a quarter on the floor I could see having a pissing match, but there is not a quarter on the floor. There is piss on the floor and I don’t need more of that. Can take care of my own just fine, thank you.

Lastly, I have a friend who is/was best friends with the poetry editor at the New Yorker. The story I was told by my friend was that the staff got so fed up with writers complaining that the editors only selected a bunch of friends to publish that the editors made an effort to select a whole new set of writers and that the complaints kept right on that the editors were only publishing their friends.

There are only so many people that we are ever going to know or care about in our lives. If some of them happen to be editors or writers then happy happy.

Hard evidence, from the slush piles I don’t see, of ezines for which I am not editor? Kelly, you set an impossible task. And as an editor, I know that the quality of any subs pile is variable, so stats are notoriously unreliable.

But how about a stab at statistical evidence?

Duotrope Stats are used as an indicator of how tough a place is to get into. (Fact.)

Frigg current stats state that they reject over 80% of submissions. They do not respond to about 12%, accept about 5% .

That makes Frigg a strong credit to have, if the stats are correct, and subs will flow in from serious writers.

Then, say a writer is rejected, looks at the current 5% acceptances and sees SIX OUT OF SEVEN are easily traceable as being from ‘mates’, ‘’colleagues from Zoetrope’, call them what you will.

I cant work out the probabilities…

A while back in a Zoe office, it was mooted whether or not a mags (think it was Smokelong) should state what proportion of their content is solicited, as a point of information for readers and potential subbers.

THE WRITERS said no!!! Why? because it LOOKS BAD.

Toms Voice mag was delighted to ask you for a piece of work, which fitted exactly what the mag is about. No, nothing suitable was rejected to make room for that piece.