Editor Interview: The Helix Literary and Art Magazine

Writing that sticks.

Because we're an undergraduate-produced magazine, I'm constantly looking for publications that defy what it means to be "undergraduate." I really enjoy The Common, Miscellany, and the Susquehanna Review. Outside of student publications--Brevity, Fjords Review, PANK, The Rumpus, The Adroit Journal, and Smokelong Quarterly.

Writers: George Saunders, Achy Obejas, Sandra Cisneros, Dorothy Allison, Zadie Smith, David Sedaris, Mary Gaitskill
Artists: Henri Matisse, Robert Gober, Frida Kahlo

Even though we're an undergraduate publication, we'll take writing from anyone, anywhere. This allows us to--more often than not--represent a wide range of voices in our magazine, rather than students alone.

Be original: I only care about your dead mother if you can give me a reason to care.
Be patient: We get a lot of submissions. If you don't receive a response in three weeks, don't send me angry emails inquiring on the status of your submission. Wait at least three months.
FOLLOW THE GUIDELINES.

There's nothing more exciting than when I read a submission Monday morning and I'm still thinking about it the following week. Doesn't matter the genre or topic, as long as it's memorable, it's ideal.

I think submitters might think that because we're student-run, we're not going to take the process seriously, which couldn't be farther from the truth. Every piece with even slight promise gets multiple read-throughs, and there's always some sort of aggressive debate. We feel strongly about our publication, and sometimes that means yelling.

Everyone who submits should include a cover letter, but often, writers will send their entire publication history in that letter, something like fifty-plus previous publications. Here's the thing: we don't care about past credits. Keep it brief. Most of our staff reads blind anyhow. We only care that the work we're reviewing works for us.

It depends on the piece. I personally select every poem or work of prose the staff reviews, and I typically read the entire work, though sometimes I can tell within the first page whether or not it will be a good fit. If there's too many grammatical errors or misspellings, to me, that shows the author didn't take care to proofread thoroughly, so why should I?

All submissions come through me first. I'll read the piece, and if it shows potential I'll bring it to the weekly table discussion where the genre editors and general readers will discuss the merit of the work and whether or not its a good fit for our publication. Then I'll review the "IN" votes at the end of the night and make the final call.

It's crazy. I try to review around 30 submissions a day, and of those, I'll select maybe 10 for a packet to send to the entire staff. Wednesday nights we meet to discuss the work, then afterwards we might go out for a beer, and the following morning I send around a new packet and it all starts over.

We typically won't take a piece if it requires substantiative edits.