VQR Closed for Business?

I missed this article last month. Sad, all around. "They have closed the offices of the Review, founded in 1925 and housed in a campus building designed by Thomas Jefferson, pending the outcome of the investigation."  Discuss, please.

Oh, Geeze...

This is just very sad and not good for anybody at the VQR. Condolences to all involved.

Updates by a colleague here and here.

But I Am a Precious Snowflake...Really I Am

Remember when the Virginia Quarterly Review (VQR) somehow decided it would be funny to post on the VQR blog all of their mean inner thoughts showing a tendency to belittle the literary submissions they receive?  That was a disaster, right? And then there was a kind of  half-apology follow-up when they realized people got pissed about this behavior.  And then remember when the VQR editor, Ted Genoways, came around to say a few words at LROD and get us to read his journal?  Well, now Genoways has a piece in Mother Jones entitled "The Death of Fiction?" in which he laments the current state of literary journals.  Here's a highlight:

Back in the 1930s, magazines like the Yale Review or VQR saw maybe 500 submissions in a year; today, we receive more like 15,000. This is due partly to a shift in our culture from a society that believed in hierarchy to one that believes in a level playing field. This is good—to a point. The reality is that not everyone can be a doctor, not everyone can be a professional athlete, and not everyone can be a writer. You may be a precious snowflake, but if you can't express your individuality in sterling prose, I don't want to read about it.

Basically, he blames the situation in large part on writers, but not really you, mice; Genoways only actually speaks to academic writers.  Here's what I mean:

... I'm saying that writers need to venture out from under the protective wing of academia, to put themselves and their work on the line. Stop being so damned dainty and polite. Treat writing like your lifeblood instead of your livelihood. And for Christ's sake, write something we might want to read.

This story is courtesy of our friend John Fox over at BookFox who offers his sage opinion on the matter.  It's worth a hop over there to read Fox's post.

Current VQR Needs

Remember the Virginia Quarterly Review incident, followed by the sort-of apology and literary cat fight? Yeah...me too.  Those were some interesting moments.

Ongoing Wiki Saga

Well, the good news is that, after several attempts by fans, followed by several failures to stick, it looks like LROD is finally on Wikipedia to stay.

The bad news is that the description fails to mention how hospitable we ultimately were: (1) we promoted, read, and discussed Darin Strauss' novel and that he did point out in the Village Voice that we were on friendly terms (though the journalist chose not to include that fact); (2) we welcomed and featured Scott Snyder's new short story collection; and (3) we had a fruitful series of discussions with Ted Genoways after VQR readers' comments were made public and Genoways apologized (sort of).

Oh well.  it doesn't matter if we're misunderstood; we still know who we are; right, mice?  At least they mentioned the GAK awards.

"We're All Hacks," says Young Writer

Here's an anonymous email from today's mail bag:

"After six years of continuous writing, continuous submissions, continuous rejection, I’ve had nine short stories published. Some in journals no one’s heard of. Well, most. I just had a story published in West Branch. A journal you can find in a bookstore. A journal with a barcode. And then I had a story nominated for the Pushcart. I’m twenty-three, and I know you’ve never heard of me. I didn’t have a problem until I went snooping around your site more. And I read Ted Genoways’ contribution, the links to stories by young writers.

Now I have a problem.

Being a young writer doesn’t grant you a god-damned thing. Does it get you more attention because your peers aren’t as introspective? Because you devote yourself to something? Do I deserve an actual response as opposed to an automated rejection email from VQR? We all do. What bullshit am I supposed to be swallowing here? That somehow being younger gives me an advantage? That the editors of VQR are plucking up young talent and perching them on the thin limb of success?

I still live at home. I don’t have a job. I have a novel that I can’t edit because I can’t stand to read it. Because it reminds me of the four other novels I’ve written. Because no one wants to read them. Getting noticed for writing doesn’t change anything. No one’s sitting in an ideal world where all their problems have dissolved because they became successful writers. Faulkner was constantly in financial distress. He drank himself to death because he was a miserable man, mostly for not making enough money as a writer. And this was after he won the Nobel prize.

Recognition doesn’t give you confidence. When you sit in front of a blank page, you’re just as miserable as everyone else who likes words. No one really knows how to tell a story. That’s why we keep trying. It’s why everyone is rejected. No one knows how to tell a story and no one knows how to read. So when a clueless writer and a clueless editor cross paths, magic happens and a story gets published, and everyone else laments and resents and calls them both hacks. We’re all hacks. The secret to writing is knowing how to exploit it. That’s what publishing is. Shame on you if you think it’s a deep, spiritual endeavor. Stories move audiences. Not writers. Not editors. We’re immune.

Today was not a good day to think about writing."

How about we show our true good natures and give this anonynewbie some encouragement?

You Bore Me, You Spoiled Brat!

Here's an interesting comment from an angry LROD reader from a recent post:

"there are other ways to make contacts besides getting an mfa...

how about making friends at a chichi artists' colony? editors who've published you? writers you've been published along side?

it must take work to have *no* friends in the lit biz, after 20 or so years. complain much wr?

your writing should usher you into the literary world on it's own merit. after all the $$$ you won, you sound like an overgrown spoiled brat. i'm sure if your defenders knew all the breaks you've had they'd think twice about championing your blog. your literary lottery winnings trump those of most people with mfa's. if you don't like where your career is at, you have only yourself to blame."

Actually, I didn't say that I had no friends after 20 years. That was a misinterpretation. (How do you think I got as far as I did in the first place?) But this dude probably has an MFA and probably doesn't like that some people are hating on the degree.

Here's another less personal one:

"LROD is the Mobius strip of blogs. Just when you start to think you're heading in a new and interesting direction, you end up where you started. I'll check back in two or three months when the whole MFA debate returns -- YET AGAIN. But only after a few entries (yawn) on VQR, Narrative, and Darrin Strauss."

My response to this comment is that I...I....zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.

Typical Southern Hospitality

Contrary to the laughing at you The Virginia Quarterly (VQR) does behind your back, here's a sampling of their official rejection form:

Dear Writer:

Thanks for your recent submission to VQR: "Title of Story." While the piece had obvious merit it just doesn't fit our needs at present. We wish we could offer a more personal response to your submission, but the number of manuscripts we receive makes this impossible. Please know, however, that we've read your work and appreciate your interest in our journal. Please do keep us in mind in the future.

Best regards,
The Editors

Seems like a pack of lies now that we know what really goes on.

Another Editor Goes Awry

If you think the recent VQR insanity wasn't enough, Rebecca Wolff, editor of Fence Magazine has apparently told one of the writers she's published to "eat shit and die," and then brags about it on her blog, publishing the childish exchange she had with the offended writer. Thanks to Book Fox for bringing it to attention. The comments on her post are good, so it's worth checking out, but here's the exchange basically in full.  It's so sick, I couldn't resist:

"One of the strangest corollaries of being a literary journal editor is being made aware from time to time of how many contributors there are out there silently hating you for a multitude of perceived offenses, however real or unreal. The below correspondence is real, but identifying facts have been changed to preserve anonymity of contributor/correspondent. Note that I, Rebecca Wolff, was the first to get truly offensive, but also note that I have developed, over the years, a deficit of patience with contributors who act as though I am somehow out to get them. Also note that I have given myself the last word here; for all I know XXX will choose to ignore my final command and will speak to me again. I’ll keep you posted.

*

February 14

Hi Rebecca Wolff,

Recently you were kind enough to accept two of my poems for the current issue of Fence. Do you send out contributors copies? Just wondering because I haven’t received anything yet.

Thanks
XXX XXXX
XX E. XXXXX Street Apt 16
New York, NY 1xxxx

PS Saw the website. Thanks for posting XXXXXXXX!

*

February 14

XXX,

Did you used to live in XXXXXXXX, NJ?

R

*

February 14

Yes. My parents live there, so if you sent it there I will get it eventually.

XXX

*

April 6

Rebecca Wolff:

Well, I finally found the time to pick up a copy of Fence—not easy, since I work three grueling shit jobs, and don’t have time to track these things down—and it’s a good issue.

Regan Good’s poem The Atlantic House, in particular, is a knockout. I can’t say the same for the way you treat your contributors, though. I edit a XXX-page journal and even though it’s tough on me financially, I make sure every contributor gets a free copy.

The fact that you’re backed by a university and still can’t fork up a lousy contributor’s copy is unforgivable. The fact that you couldn’t even answer my simple question as to whether or not you provide complimentary copies is even worse. I guess my question wasn’t intellectually-ambitious or post-post-post-avant enough for you.

XXX XXXX

*

April 6

See below; eat shit and die.

Sincerely,

Rebecca Wolff

“February 14

XXX,
Did you used to live in XXXXXXXX, NJ?
R

February 14
Yes. My parents live there, so if you sent it there I will get it eventually.
XXX”

*

April 20

What is this supposed to mean? I was just at my parents last week and no Fence, and this months after it came out. Is “eat shit and die” your way of saying you sent it to me? [Editor’s note: What I should have said was: “No, eat shit and die is my way of saying check your facts, you corroded node, before getting on your high horse to send me an email accusing me of not doing my job.] If you DID send it to me, you could’ve just said so and all this could have been avoided. Like I said, it never got to me. I’ve supported you for years, buying your mag and sticking up for it when my writer-friends basically condemned it.

Let me share a brief anecdote:

One spring day when I was sixteen, my friend and I were posting flyers at XXXXX Academy (private school for rich kids) for a concert our metal band was playing. The board was in the dining hall and soon as we walked into the room–two skinny long-hairs–the place went dead. Then someone yelled “Throw them out!” and we were basically driven out on a rail. It wasn’t traumatic at all, but the memory has remained for its novelty, I think it’s kind of funny, actually. But more to the point, I’ve always thought of that dining hall as being the equivalent of Fence (read: snobbery). You’ve proven me right.

XXX

*

April 20

XXX,

I just don’t take kindly to receiving accusatory mail. Read your email to me and you will see that you are attacking me for not responding to your initial query when, in fact, as I showed you in my response (and that’s why I said “E. S. & D,” because I was proving you wrong), I DID respond to your query. Yes, I sent the issue to the NJ address; I don’t know why it never reached there but all you had to do was write back politely and say that the issue never reached there and I would gladly send another. Instead you wrote me a snotty note–I am not responsible for your or anyone’s neurotic complex about high school–implying that I had not responded to your query, when in fact I had.

If you would like to give me your correct address I will send the issue there.

RW

*

April 21

Becky Coyote,

God you are a vile human being. Saw your photo at Norton Poets Online and in Poets and Writers–your looks match up with your personality perfectly. No wonder you have issues. And I feel sorry for your kid–I’m sure he’ll grow up to be mean and ugly, just like his mommy.
*

April 21

You’re a total loser. Never speak to me again."

Yikes! Lady editor is a piece of work, and offended writer got pretty damn low to the ground, too. Seems like more of the same.

Junker v. Genoways

Looks like now the editors of VQR  (Ted Genowasy) and Zyzzyva (Howard Junker) are going at each other.  Have a read here.  What I love is how Genoways, who has apologized for ridiculing slush pile writers, cannot pass a chance to justify his actions.  Funny.  Says Genoways of Junker, who has claimed to be shocked at VQR's offensive comments:  "Of course, two weeks ago—on the Zyzzyva blog—Junker likened his own slush pile to a “barrel of crap” and a week before that compared it to John Bunyan’s “slough of despond.” (For those of you not up on your Pilgrim’s Progress, one scholar cited on Wikipedia explains that it is 'the low ground where the scum and filth of a guilty conscience, caused by conviction of sin, continually gather.')"  Oh dear.  To me they seem so alike that they should be at a bar having a drink, not pummeling each other in public.  But what do I know?

VQR Rejection

An anonymous LROD reader, sends us this fuel for our recent fire:

Dear [name of rejected writer]:

Thanks for your recent submission to VQR. While the piece had obvious merit it just doesn't fit our needs at present. We wish we could offer a more personal response to your submission, but the number of manuscripts we receive makes this impossible. Please know, however, that we've read your work and appreciate your interest in our journal. Please do keep us in mind in the future.

Best regards,
The Editors

Says our rejected friend: "I sent this not even four days ago and I got a rejection, which makes me blatantly hate the journal even more. Why don't they just have their rejections instead say, "We wish we could read your work, but the number of manuscripts makes this impossible." At least then they'd be being honest. Anyway, thought I'd share."

BTW, keep reading the stories Ted Genoways posted. We don't want to look like schmoes, or anything, do we?

Ward Six Responds to Genoways

Our friend, and all around good-do bee, Rhian Ellis at Ward Six read all the VQR stories Ted Genoways put up for consideration.  She gets a gold star.  Her thoughts are here, for those who are interested.

Blah, Blah, Blah

VQR's Ted Genoways stopped by on LROD's comment section yesterday to join the discussion. He wants us to read his stories at VQR by "all by young writers" (as if that is going to be a selling point for us old shoes), and then to explain to him how they represent "one type of sensibility," which is an ongoing accusation about literary magazines in general. Feel free to read his stories and comment, if you wish.  Or read these stories instead.

Here's what Ted said:

"The thing that provokes me from my silence, however, is the obvious fact that you criticize the fiction from VQR while evidencing the fact that you haven't read a word of it.

So let me help. Here is a healthy dose of fiction, a half dozen stories, from recent issues--all of by young writers. You want to complain? Let's be specific:

http://www.vqronline.org/articles/2007/winter/alarcon-circus/
http://www.vqronline.org/articles/2007/spring/habila-hotel-malogo/
http://www.vqronline.org/articles/2007/summer/kamlani-zanzibar/
http://www.vqronline.org/articles/2007/fall/roncagliolo-internal-affairs/
http://www.vqronline.org/articles/2008/winter/johnson-last-dead/
http://www.vqronline.org/articles/2008/spring/snyder-13th-egg/

When you finish reading, I hope you will explain to me how these stories represent "one type of sensibility." Of course, I guess they represent MY one sensibility, but if you think there's a sameness here, I'd very much like to hear your description of what it is--not in generalities, but in the specifics of what appears in our pages."

VQR Apology...Sort Of

After posting some questionable insider editorial comments displaying a less-than-professional attitude toward submitting writers on its blog, VQR apologized for the offense.  Having stirred up hornets everywhere, what else could the lit mag editors do? The apology starts out so well:

"VQR wishes to apologize to any writers who took offense to our recent blog entries, in which we made public anonymized snippets from internal correspondence regarding our submissions. It seems obvious—and is regrettable—that some writers got the idea that VQR delights in belittling unsolicited submissions. Nothing could be further from the truth. This publication—and, indeed, its long-standing reputation—is built on a tradition of finding fine work by new writers amid the slush pile...."

The paragraph goes on to list all the well-known literati who have graced the pages of VQR But then quickly takes a turn toward blame of the unknown writer:

"In short, the tone of our blog post did not correctly represent our commitment to our authors. This is a disservice to our submitters, our readers, and our goals. However, I do think that the comments, if not their public airing, are a fair response to many of the submissions we receive and accurately reflect the righteous indignation that we often feel as readers. Too much of what we see these days strikes us as merely competent—well-crafted but passionless in its execution or, just as often, passionate only about the minor travails of the world of its author. No editor nor writer feels more strongly about the possibility of finding the universal in the small, but we also ravenously crave great writing that takes on big issues. Gutsy, fearless, hard-nosed writing. Writing that matters. Its absence makes us ill-tempered; it makes us question our enterprise. We work hard and want to see evidence of equal effort from writers. Such discussions, however, should be undertaken more thoughtfully than we have done thus far on the blog. I hope personally to rectify that situation and soon. Some writers have demanded to know why we have grown to feel such frustration toward our submitters. It’s a question worthy of a thoughtful answer—and will likely be as controversial as anything Waldo has said. But at least the discussion will center on what we consider the shortcomings of American writing, not a few comments meant to be private expressions of disappointment and frustration."

Oh, of course, it's the writers' fault for being shitty writers.  Should have known. You can read the full apology here.

Barf-o You, VQ

A commenter on this blog named PUC (thank you all for picking names; it makes the anonymice nest less confusing), found this delightful insight from Virginia Quarterly Review. It's a list of comments from their screening readers, which probably ought to have been left a private joke, but now appears on the VQR blog posted by Waldo Jaquith, as follows:

"Since I often get a laugh out of reading through some of the notes that our beleaguered readers provide for these particularly unfortunate submissions, it seems worthwhile to share them.  Here are some of my favorites:

• The emotional problems of clipping fingernails. Actually the best of his submissions.
  
• OK, I’m just going to say it. This writing is plain ugly.
  
• “Soon he fitted his body into mine like a puzzle piece.” NONONONONONONONONO!
  
• Planet of the Apes fan-fiction! Have we no standards?
  
• Why does the speaker’s wife only want babies from Chinese shacks? This is the craziest poem. And the scariest. I feel like we should the call the cops on this guy. (There should be a category called “Inappropriate to Humanity.”)
  
• Unpublished Faulkner. Should remain unpublished.
  
• I can’t enumerate all the ways in which this is horrible.....[more here, but I lost heart]
• This guy has either the best or the worst cover letter ever. As for the poem, barf-o."
  

Charming! (There are more comments from LROD readers in response to yesterday's post, if you are interested.)