Skip to Content

Editor Interview: Fairy Tale Review

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

A: Fairy tales in all forms

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

A: We admire them all, but especially Action Books, Coffee House Press, Little Star, Spork, and Lady Churchill's Rosebud Wristlet. In fairy tales specifically, we appreciate Princeton University Press's new series "Oddly Modern Fairy Tales" and we admire Wayne State University Press's Series in Fairy-Tale Studies, along with the journal Marvels & Tales (which WSU distributes). But we really admire the work being done at so many journals and presses.

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

A: Writers and translators and editors of fairy tales, from Angela Carter to Italo Calvino, John Cheever to Stevie Smith, Andrew Lang to Christina Rossetti. And Patti Smith.

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

A: We are the only journal that specifically selects, and seeks to contextualize, all of the work that we publish within the art form of fairy tales. This is an international, multi-century, diverse, innovative tradition; we seek to give readers new ways of reading fairy tales, new ways of thinking about them. Readers may find writing along the spectrum of mainstream to experimental in Fairy Tale Review, and it is fairy-tale like in its sensation.

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

A: Read fairy tales, and then read more fairy tales. They may be the ones in Fairy Tale Review, or they may be on the library shelf. Then do what it is that you do. "There are fairy tales yet to be written," as Andre Breton once said.

Q: Describe the ideal submission.

A: Any of our back issues will answer that question, but we have had to turn down many , many submissions that were also ideal. So imagine those too. They all feel like fairy tales. It does seem that many of our submissions come to us specifically--ardently---carefully---not willy nilly. Though some of our contributors publish widely, most of the submissions that come to us feel almost to have been written just for us---how it feels when you love reading something. It's a sensation. On a practical level, because it's nice to have practical advice, it is good to know that the person sending the work knows where they are sending it---that a robot hasn't sent it to us. Nothing against robots. We have published stories about robots.

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

A: Sending when our submission period is closed? But how can we mind? They are sending us fairy tales!

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

A: We care about the manuscript first and foremost. The forthcoming issue includes work by a middle school student and someone who recently won a prestigious literary prize. A nice cover letter with interesting information in it can be nice, of course, meaning one that is not aggressive. It's lovely when someone mentions a previous contribution, or favorite fairy tale, or something about their readerly life.

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

A: We read every piece to The End, of course.

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

A: We have a team of dedicated volunteer readers, guest editors, assistant editors, interns, and advisory members who consider the work to be accepted. In the spirit of fairy tales, this is a collaboration and it is non-hierarchical in nature.

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

A: The work is submitted to the email address during the reading period; it is read by a number of people; it is agreed that we love it; we send an email (or make a phone call) to the writer. All of this happens while all of the people reading manuscripts are also holding down full-time jobs or multiple part-time jobs, running other presses or editing other journals, writing books and stories and scholarship, raising children, volunteering at food banks, etc. So "behind the scenes" can be chaotic, and too slow from the point of view of those who submit to us, we know---but we promise we are doing our best to take care of your work. We know it matters to you.

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

A: We are not sure what "traditional" means, as a journal dedicated to arguably one of the oldest art forms (fairy tales) and one of the newest too. Tradition is innovation, sometimes. So, we think there are so many ways to bring readers together. There are more ways than ever, and fewer. Everyone does not have a computer; but more importantly, everyone cannot read. And around the world some people are not in safe zones where reading is even an option; it would be a grand luxury. It's difficult to answer this question. We are in support of many initiatives to bring new literature into people's lives. Technology may be one of those ways. It may not sometimes too. As long as we remain "about" reading and celebrating the global, diverse art form of fairy tales---its stylistic variety and ability to join readers across genres and time---we're glad to do it however we can. Pigeon express is okay by us; so is telepathy. We love bookmobiles. But we also utilize technology, when we can afford it, that seems possibly to allow us to get our work to more people, and by more we mean "some." In the short run, at least.