Editor Interview: Moonstruck Books

Otherworldly, haunting!

Moonstruck Books was inspired by two small presses: McSweeney’s Books and McNally Editions. McSweeney’s started as a literary magazine founded by Dave Eggers, with the aim of publishing excellent fiction considered “too weird” to be accepted anywhere else. Likewise, McNally Editions publishes exquisitely designed revivals of “forgotten gems” of literature.

My favorite writers toe the line between exquisite description and sickening accuracy. I'll read anything by Toni Morrison, Joyce Carol Oates, Hilary Mantel, PD James, David Mamet, David Foster Wallace, Tessa Hadley, Han Kang, Miranda July, Yoko Ogawa, Manuel Puig, and Magda Szabo. I prefer literature in translation and/or by non-American, non-male, non-traditional writers.

Oddballs, geniuses, weirdos, eccentrics, and visionaries are all welcome at Moonstruck Books. As a small press, we eschew the metrics-driven logic of big publishing houses. It is our joy to focus on quality, authenticity, and individuality. We sustain editorial relationships that nurture writers throughout their careers, from relative newcomers to established authors. Integrity and transparency are vital to our work, and we place our values first in every decision. We focus on quality over speed; our editorial team prefers to remain anonymous.

Read authors whose names you don't see on social media. Moonstruck Books focuses exclusively on quality of writing, not popularity or analytics. We look for authors whose values align with our own. Our standards are very exacting, and we publish stories that will cling to your imagination like a bloody mist.

The ideal submission follows submission guidelines! I am looking for boundary-pushing fiction that questions the dominant cultural narrative. Horror, horrifying fiction, and science fiction that bends tropes will always get my attention. (If it has kids on bikes, "could be a movie/series/comic book," or flinches away from gore, I'm not interested.) Moonstruck Books takes outsider fiction seriously. We prefer to work with unpublished authors or unknowns; authors belonging to a historically marginalized group and/or identifying as lesbian or gay, queer, transgender or nonbinary; Black, Indigenous, Latinx, people of color (BIPOC); blue collar writers, self-supporting writers, anti-commercial writers, and people from non-affluent backgrounds; people who live with chronic illness and other disabilities; and other individual experiences which are not traditionally centered in mainstream publishing; authors originating from a rural, agricultural, or otherwise overlooked or unglamorous region within the United States; self-taught authors who have no formal education, such as university courses or MFAs, or access to residencies, grants, fellowships, and other privileges; authors originating from a country, nation, or homeland outside the United States.

Most often, it's an issue of formatting. Authors sometimes include Moonstruck Books in a shotgun blast of submissions, which is very obvious. These submissions usually include a generic pitch letter and a manuscript that is (1) not a genre we publish, (2) not ready for publication, (3) not aligned with our stated values, and/or (4) more commercial than creative. It's also very obvious when an author considers Moonstruck Books to be "small potatoes," an easy acceptance letter. The editorial relationship between publisher and author begins with this first contact, so I suggest these writers consider their approach carefully. Submitting a book can be disheartening, grueling work. With that said, matching with a publisher is not like swiping on Tinder. Take your time, read more library books, and be a human.

I could care less about how published someone is. The publication process is intimate; sharing your writing and being willing to revise with someone requires a high degree of trust. Cover letters give me a sense of the writer as a person. Do I want to work closely with this person for a year? I would prefer to work with an exciting but inexperienced writer on a wonderful book, than a well-known, often-published author whose ego overshadows their talent.

This is not a question I can answer. Our submission guidelines are very clear, and I believe that authors who we're meant to work with will understand what we're looking for.

I always schedule a phone call with a prospective author after reading their manuscript. We must work together and be aligned on the vision for the book; otherwise, I can't proceed. I have learned that many authors are baffled by the idea of having a conversation with a real human being. They are used to receiving edits from a faceless automaton, maybe? But it's important to me that this process is collaborative; editing is creative, just like writing. So if I talk to a writer on the phone and we're a match, I move forward with offering a contract.

I'll say this: I only read submissions if I'm in a good mood. I feel I owe it to writers to show up happy, excited, and caffeinated. Reading slush is not always easy, but I bring a positive attitude to it. I think it's unfair to slash through submissions with a machete.

Editing is not surgery, though some people treat it that way. I think of editing as a generative, creative process: my edits at every level of the manuscript are invitations to evolve. By the time a book is published, it should feel mature. It should fulfill all of its promise and be ready to be enjoyed by readers.

Yes: I stand by all my titles. I put a substantial amount of financial support into each book. This includes a budget line item for award submissions.