submission guidelines

Only if you have a crystal ball or a TARDIS.

No. You don't need to. It's even acceptable to submit simultaneously when the guidelines say "no simultaneous submissions." The chances of actually getting two bites are next to nothing, and editorial responses (if they respond at all) are glacially slow.

Submit to everybody, don't tell them its simultaneous, and don't apologize for doing it that way. If you do get two offers, start a bidding war.

Brickcommajason said:

No. You don't need to. It's even acceptable to submit simultaneously when the guidelines say "no simultaneous submissions."

Submit to everybody, don't tell them its simultaneous, and don't apologize for doing it that way. If you do get two offers, start a bidding war.

Click to expand...

This is really bad advice. You won't start a bidding war; there's plenty of other submissions to choose from if your piece isn't included. You're nothing special, you're one of several hundred in most cases.

In my editorial experience (having edited for several magazines and journals over the last 6 years)--there's generally a reason why the editorial staff ask you not to do it. If you submit to multiple markets simultaneously and then withdraw your work because it has been accepted elsewhere, you've wasted one editor's time. That shows a lack of respect for them and their review and an inability to follow guidelines--this also paints you to be unreliable and unprofessional.

Yes, editors rely on contributors for content, but contributors also rely on outlets to get their work out there. It's a symbiotic relationship that can't function when either party loses credibility or when one decides to take the piss out of the work relationship.

If you withdraw your piece, do it respectfully and with an apology. Offer a new piece to replace it, or start the submissions process afresh. There are editors that use blacklists for unreliable contributors, whereas reliable contributors can become recurrent sources of material by direct request--remember that you are not the only person to submit something for consideration, the slush-piles are generally extremely vast (less than 3% of all unsolicited submissions across journals meets publication), and don't forget that patience is a virtue.

If you are asked NOT to submit simultaneously, have the respect to wait for a response before subbing elsewhere. If guidelines state that simultaneous subs are OK, by all means, do so; give a courtesy heads up in the submission query if you feel the need (though not necessary)--but remember to withdraw.

To clarify,

Totally kidding about the bidding war.

But the advice I've gotten from insiders for the past ten years has been to ignore the "simultaneous submissions" rule. This from professional writers who sell to titles like Nat'l Geographic, Hemispheres and Newsweek.

They have the following reasons for this advice:

• The chances of actually getting two bites on the same bait are astronomically low
• Editors take months to say "no thanks" and increasingly don't even bother doing that
• Worst case scenario, you can recast one of the articles and sell both (admittedly, this works best for nonfiction...and not at all for poetry).

To be fair, neither I nor any of my advisers have actually been in a situation where two magazines actually offered to buy the same piece...so we could all be talking out of our bums.

On the other hand, if it's never happened to any of us in our combined 50 or 60 years experience....

Brickcommajason said:

But the advice I've gotten from insiders for the past ten years has been to ignore the "simultaneous submissions" rule. This from professional writers who sell to titles like Nat'l Geographic, Hemispheres and Newsweek ... ... ... ...

... ... ... To be fair, neither I nor any of my advisers have actually been in a situation where two magazines actually offered to buy the same piece...so we could all be talking out of our bums.

Click to expand...

You probably will be able to 'get away with it' in the case of such magazines seeing as their submissions pool is going to be much larger than some others.

Pre-acceptance agreements are becoming more and more common practice too, and in most cases they include a clause that states you represent the submission of your work and the exclusivity of it while under consideration until it is returned.

kborsden said:

In my editorial experience (having edited for several magazines and journals over the last 6 years)--there's generally a reason why the editorial staff ask you not to do it. If you submit to multiple markets simultaneously and then withdraw your work because it has been accepted elsewhere, you've wasted one editor's time. That shows a lack of respect for them and their review and an inability to follow guidelines--this also paints you to be unreliable and unprofessional

Click to expand...

It's also a pet-hate for many literary agents.

Poets have agents now?

Blarg said:

Poets have agents now?

Click to expand...

Some do... those that have traditionally published anthologies and chapbooks etc.

Seriously? Hard to imagine.

Apropos of chapbooks, I wonder whatever happened to caseyquinn. I liked him and his stuff. He did a lot of chapbooks and got some strong reviews for them.

By the way I'm saying that not as some kind of weird rhetorical question.

Blarg said:

Seriously? Hard to imagine.

Click to expand...

Why is it harder to imagine a successful poet using an agent to pitch their work to publishers than other writers?

No agent pitches to magazines, but a writer who has been published enough previously, has a decent following and known name is as potential a source of income as any other writer, and a somewhat safer bet.

Blarg said:

Apropos of chapbooks, I wonder whatever happened to caseyquinn. I liked him and his stuff. He did a lot of chapbooks and got some strong reviews for them.

Click to expand...

I mentioned 'traditionally published'--the majority of chapbooks are self-pubbed and, unfortunately, of a very bad quality in both the writing and editing... even format. Anyone willing to put the effort in to produce something of a high standard is worthy of a 'strong review' in my eyes, even if most on Amazon just get their 322 Facebook friends to write them 5 stars.

kborsden said:

Why is it harder to imagine a successful poet using an agent to pitch their work to publishers than other writers?

Click to expand...

Because poetry books sell so few copies, leaving so little for an agent to reap as his percentage. It's hard to imagine it being worth his time. Even a Pulitzer winner and national poet laureate sure better have a day job. Wallace Stevens worked as an insurance executive all his life, and I doubt it was because he was completely fascinated by the ramifications of insurance. I remember reading of someone whose mother pulled, as a kid, him aside when Stevens was walking through their neighborhood, in awe, telling him that he was looking at a great man, and to remember this. And she was right, too. Doubt there was much money in that though.

Literary agents aren't paid per copy.

Some are. That's an ongoing gripe with people like J.A. Konrath, Barry Eisley, and Dean Wesley Smith, all of whom talk about it extensively on their blogs and books.

Alternatively what kind of advances would a poetry book expect to garner?

To be clear, I'm not disagreeing with your experience, because disagreeing with anyone's personal experience makes no sense at all. I'm just saying I'm surprised agents would bother with such slim pickings. And if a percentage throughout the life of the property were not involved? All the more so. It's hard to imagine smaller money than poetry.

It depends on how widely known a poet is. Stephen Knight, for example, has written a number of prize winning books and since turned his attention to prose. Although a poet, his first few chapbooks were gateways to larger projects, media and social projects, advertising campaigns and new literary areas, these would have all been managed/arranged with or through the agent. Literary agents who handle poetry know many avenues and viable alternatives to publishing alone.

kborsden said:

Literary agents aren't paid per copy.

Click to expand...

Aren't they? Most get a percentage of whatever the author they represent earns from the deals the agent brokers. Thus more copies (potentially) = higher pay for the agent.

Unless you're saying agents aren't paid per copy printed. Just copies sold. In that case, totally agree.

In the round-about way, yes.

The agent takes a commission from what the author earns. Agents have to sell your book for you to earn money to pay their 15% from your royalties. Better publishing deal=better pay. Depends on how you look at it...