Editor Interview: Red River Review

Writing & Visual Arts

We admire publications and presses with strong editorial identities, serious attention to craft, and an expansive sense of what a literary publication can hold. Among those we return to are Tupelo Quarterly, Blackbird, Gulf Coast, Waxwing, The Offing, and Copper Canyon Press. We especially value publications that bring writing and visual art into conversation, support both emerging and established voices, and treat literary publishing as an ongoing creative and communal practice.

I return often to writers including Carolyn Forché, Louise Glück, W.S. Merwin, Li-Young Lee, Sharon Olds, Rita Dove, Quan Barry, Joy Harjo, Ilya Kaminsky, Muriel Rukeyser, Monica Ferrell, Virginia Woolf, Louise Erdrich, Raymond Carver, Flannery O’Connor, Joyce Carol Oates, Mary Karr, and Gabriel García Márquez. I’m drawn to writers whose work carries a distinctive way of seeing and pressure, with close attention to image, voice, psychological and emotional complexity, and the tension between lyric and narrative movement, particularly where private experience meets the larger world.

Red River Review began as an online poetry journal in 1999 and has grown into a broader literary arts publication. We publish distinctive poetry, short fiction, creative nonfiction, hybrid work, photography, and visual art, while also offering conversations, classes, workshops, and other programming for writers, artists, and readers.

Read the journal first, then send us the work you most want to stand behind. We are interested in many styles and forms, but the work should feel intentional, fully considered, and alive. We value strong voice, image, structure, movement, and a distinctive way of seeing. Follow the guidelines carefully, but don’t try to write toward our taste.

The ideal submission creates a sense of encounter, with a voice, image, place, question, tension, or way of seeing that feels particular to the writer or artist. We are drawn to work that allows its language, images, structure, voice, or visual composition to carry meaning without over-explaining. It may be quiet or urgent, traditional or experimental, but its choices should feel intentional and its language, images, structure, or visual composition should be doing meaningful work.

The most common problems are practical ones: submitting work in the wrong category, exceeding the stated limits, or not responding promptly after acceptance. Once a piece is accepted, we request contributor materials such as a bio, photograph, links, and any needed permissions. Delays in receiving those materials can hold up design, layout, and publication. Because we use anonymous editorial review, there is no need to establish credentials in a cover letter or biography. We want the work itself to enter the editorial conversation first.

Very little during editorial review. We read anonymously, and publication credits do not influence our decisions. We want the work to stand on its own. If we accept a piece, we then ask for a short bio, photograph, website or social links, and any materials or permissions needed for publication and promotion.

We read poems, flash, and shorter work in full, often more than once. With longer fiction and creative nonfiction, we may stop reading if it becomes clear that a piece is not a fit for the journal. Because our prose limit is 3,000 words, we expect the work to establish its voice and direction fairly early.

Work under consideration is read and evaluated independently by both the editor and associate editor. We then come together to discuss the piece, compare our responses, and consider its strengths, the choices the writer or artist is making, and whether it is a good fit for Red River Review before reaching a final decision. When useful, we may seek an additional reader with relevant knowledge of a particular form, subject, cultural context, or visual practice to help inform the editorial process.

A lot of reading, rereading, and talking about work, followed by contributor correspondence, layout, website updates, and the other practical work of keeping the journal moving. Like many independent literary journals, much of it happens around day jobs and ordinary life.

We accept work because we believe in it as submitted, so authors should not expect substantial developmental editing after acceptance. We may suggest light edits for clarity, consistency, grammar, punctuation, or formatting, and we consult the contributor when a change affects the work itself.
For poetry, we take particular care to preserve line breaks, spacing, punctuation, and visual arrangement. Contributors have the opportunity to review and approve changes before publication. Our goal is to present the work as thoughtfully and accurately as possible while preserving the writer’s voice and intent.

Yes, we plan to resume Pushcart Prize nominations in 2026, with the goal of expanding nominations to additional national and international awards as our capacity grows.

Red River Review is currently supported through editor funding and submission fees. These funds help cover our submission platform, website and hosting costs, archive preservation, and creative and educational programming.

Red River Review promotes the journal and its contributors through our website, newsletter, Facebook, Instagram, and other digital channels. We share issue announcements, contributor features, excerpts and highlights from published work, event and submission updates, and links to contributors’ websites or social pages when available. We also use craft conversations, readings, classes, and other programming to create additional opportunities for readers to engage with contributors and the work we publish.