Skip to Content

Editor Interview: Talking Writing Magazine

Q: Describe what you publish in 25 characters or less.

A: Dynamic, innovative

Q: What other current publications (or publishers) do you admire most?

A: Tin House, n+1, Carve, A Public Space, Narrative

Q: If you publish writing, who are your favorite writers? If you publish art, who are your favorite artists?

A: Kurt Vonnegut, Charles D'Ambrosio, Alice Munro, Charles Baxter, Karen Russell

Q: What sets your publication apart from others that publish similar material?

A: Our editor in chief, Martha Nichols, put it best: "We are committed to a new kind of magazine, one that’s dynamic, talky, inspiring, and not too dusty." We are an online only publication that fully engages all forms of social media. And we love taking chances on writing that takes risks.

Q: What is the best advice you can give people who are considering submitting work to your publication?

A: Only send us something that you have truly sweated bullets over. It is very disheartening to read a draft of something that's clearly only half finished. That said, if you have written something that inspires you, that is alive, that you feel in your gut is true, then we want to see it.

Q: Describe the ideal submission.

A: The ideal submission has me thoroughly oriented on page 1. I know where I am, and the ground in this fictional world is solid. The writer has taken loving care with the language. Style and content inform each other. Make me laugh and score a bonus point.

Q: What do submitters most often get wrong about your submissions process?

A: Submitting work that feels woefully incomplete. When a story is only draft #2, and when no other eyeballs other than the author's have seen it, it shows.

Q: How much do you want to know about the person submitting to you?

A: I care about who is sending the story in the same way I always read the "about the author" blurb on the jacket of any book that interests me. Such information, though, is purely anecdotal. If the story doesn't come alive on it's own, having the Paris Review on ones CV won't help it.

Q: If you publish writing, how much of a piece do you read before making the decision to reject it?

A: More often then not, you can tell a story isn't right within a page or two (and sometimes within a sentence or two). But I come to each piece a blank slate, starry eyed, wanting to fall in love!

Q: What additional evaluations, if any, does a piece go through before it is accepted?

A: I also consult my two invaluable colleagues, Martha Nichols, the editor in chief, and Elizabeth Langosy, executive editor.

Q: What is a day in the life of an editor like for you?

A: There isn't a whole lot to see behind the curtain. A piece is submitted, we're alerted via email, and if it's fiction, I coordinate the reading process. When something catches my fancy, I bring it to the group. Our behind-the-scenes process would make for a pretty boring movie.

Q: How important do you feel it is for publishers to embrace modern technologies?

A: It's incumbent on all of us to understand the world we live in while holding fast to our convictions of why art matters, and why the world needs it. Those of us who did not grow up with a particular technology will always look suspiciously on those who came of age with it, and vice versa, and we need to be aware of this dynamic, which is as old as cave paintings. Technology is not neutral and we must remain critical without turning into the very cranks we mocked way back in our grad school days.