Editor Interview: The Foundationalist Journal

Intercollegiate Journal

I love the aesthetic of Waxwing Journal, the content of the Offing & the Adroit Journal, and of course, the New York Times Fiction & Poetry staff.

Give us the most authentic, genuine sense of you as a writer! We receive so many fantastic works of writing that demonstrate mastery of language or mirror the writing styles of certain authors, but we are most drawn toward those that share a unique perspective. This can be manifested in a variety of ways from experimental form or structure in poetry to fragmented narrative structures in fiction but we care about works that clearly showcase the author's passion for writing. When you pick topics or themes that resonate with your own lived experience or what fascinates your imagination, it shows.

Clearly intentional. Moving beyond beautiful language or mastery of writing conventions to raise tough questions, highlight ambiguities, or reframe the everyday in a new light.

By asking writers to "challenge" a genre, we're not asking for them to re-write the rules of a good literary analysis or prose. However, we want to see them question commonly used conventions or trends. For example, if everyone in academia is writing about Shakespeare and the intersection of music we want a unique thesis that brings ties in interest areas outside of what has already been reiterated. If a passion our author's is more common or trending that's okay! We favour genuine interest over feigned artistic edginess.

We just want to see the work that the author considers their best writing! We take geographical diversity into consideration and therefore request their home undergraduate institution, but the work itself takes precedence. Our journal is meant to be a platform for both exploration and excellence. We embrace experienced authors who include past publications or their inspiration/writing process in cover letters but equally look for those who have never been published, just started creative writing, or are looking for feedback on how to improve their writing.

The piece will go through multiple board member reads. Our editorial board is so unique in that it is shared between three undergraduate universities across the country and our members are extremely diverse; from Biochemistry majors to Classics to Engish majors. This diversity in board members allows the work to be approached from multiple perspectives from experienced close readers to those who might just enjoy picking up a copy of the Foundationalist for a rainy day.

Our editing is primarily holistic. We will fact check and edit essays for consistency in citation, however, we expect pieces to come fully polished grammatically. This applies to our creative writing works as well. We many times offer up feedback that we believe may elevate the piece to publishing-readiness, but the author is the final decider of our suggested revisions. These revisions address larger issues like confusion in plot-lines or character underdevelopment. We don't tell the author's what words to use; that's a show of a great writer to be able to accomplish the final goal or impression by using their own words!

We are just beginning to dip our feet into the award realm. We want to give our authors as much exposure as possible and awards are a fantastic way to do that, but we also don't want to be known for catering solely to prestige. We care about fostering a strong writing scene in our home institution and amongst undergraduate universities first and foremost--the awards and monetary considerations come secondary.