Wednesday, June 06, 2007
It seems a little odd to me...
...for a journal to say they wouldn't publish poems that had been posted to online workshops, given that:
Seems to me a better rule would be "nothing I can find by Googling." This would allow posting and subsequent deletion of drafts on blogs, and posting to online workshops, but prevent "permanent" posting on personal websites and other such things the editors might not like. I've even printed a few Googlable poems in The Eleventh Muse because they were good poems--can't say that it hurt the journal's reputation or sales.
- Those poems are drafts that are almost always changed by the time they go out seeking publication.
- Good online workshops are search-engine-resistant.
- Good online workshops flush their old drafts after a fairly short amount of time.
- Most online workshops at least allow the poet to go back and delete the draft prior to submission or publication.
- Regardless of the limitless potential audience of the Internet, most online workshops have an actual audience well under 100.
- Most online workshop denizens are prone to posting about when and where their work is appearing, which will increase the profile of the journal, not hurt it.
Seems to me a better rule would be "nothing I can find by Googling." This would allow posting and subsequent deletion of drafts on blogs, and posting to online workshops, but prevent "permanent" posting on personal websites and other such things the editors might not like. I've even printed a few Googlable poems in The Eleventh Muse because they were good poems--can't say that it hurt the journal's reputation or sales.
Labels: poetry, publication, workshops
Comments:
<< Home
Hey Steve: Now there's a great idea! Definitely needs to be added to the blog-posted poem debate page.
Is Google the reason why you post your draft poems as pdf files (at least that's what I think they are)?
All best, Nic
Is Google the reason why you post your draft poems as pdf files (at least that's what I think they are)?
All best, Nic
Hi Nic:
Actually, they're GIF files--a PDF is more searchable than a GIF. I post them like that for a few reasons: more search-proof, easier to delete, harder to copy, and easier to retain special formatting.
Actually, they're GIF files--a PDF is more searchable than a GIF. I post them like that for a few reasons: more search-proof, easier to delete, harder to copy, and easier to retain special formatting.
Which journal has this rule?
I must admit though, it's one of the reasons I stopped posting in online workshops. There were other reasons too, but that one was a biggie.
I must admit though, it's one of the reasons I stopped posting in online workshops. There were other reasons too, but that one was a biggie.
If you read the ongoing debate at Nic's blog (verylikeawhale.wordpress.com), you'll see a couple journal editors stating the "no workshop-posted poems" rule.
You know, this discussion has to be the biggest joke online today.
Well, maybe the one about how bad bloggers are at book reviews, as told to us by the 'pro' book reviewers at the Times and the Post, is more silly.
You'd think these poetry zines were paying people, huh? But they're not. Are they? So, what the hell does it matter? I mean to anyone who isn't a self-inflated windbag with delusions of literary fame?
Hey look everbody, publication has been cheapened to the point we all can do it easily. Getting something 'published' is no big deal now. Oh, look at all the self-inflated 'pros' puffing up to defend their quality. [yawn]
Here's Pie-In-The-Sky ezine that won't take this or won't take that because of it's rules on today's indefinable .. "what constitutes published?" Fine, don't send P-I-T-S editors anything. Let their narrow ideas narrow even more. It's always fun to listen to them complain at parties at the sad state poetry's fallen into. Not as much fun as listening to book reviewers whine about their threatened jobs, but it's up there in the top 10.
And when do these windbags get more than laughter for their pretentiousness? How about when they lead with how much dollars they're payin' before spoutin' on the rules about disqualified entries?
Is a piece that hasn't appeared in a forum, or on a blog, or somewhere in UseNet limbo, more valuable than one that has? Well, not so anyone would notice any difference in their wallet, right? Not so anyone would notice on any level, is more like it.
If their rules are designed to their ego's specification, and are merely manifestations of fear and laziness, then they really do deserve the teeny, tiny audiences they have. Will always have.
OK, here's someone calling for you to do hoops for no real reward, try not to laugh in his face.
-blue
Post a Comment
Well, maybe the one about how bad bloggers are at book reviews, as told to us by the 'pro' book reviewers at the Times and the Post, is more silly.
You'd think these poetry zines were paying people, huh? But they're not. Are they? So, what the hell does it matter? I mean to anyone who isn't a self-inflated windbag with delusions of literary fame?
Hey look everbody, publication has been cheapened to the point we all can do it easily. Getting something 'published' is no big deal now. Oh, look at all the self-inflated 'pros' puffing up to defend their quality. [yawn]
Here's Pie-In-The-Sky ezine that won't take this or won't take that because of it's rules on today's indefinable .. "what constitutes published?" Fine, don't send P-I-T-S editors anything. Let their narrow ideas narrow even more. It's always fun to listen to them complain at parties at the sad state poetry's fallen into. Not as much fun as listening to book reviewers whine about their threatened jobs, but it's up there in the top 10.
And when do these windbags get more than laughter for their pretentiousness? How about when they lead with how much dollars they're payin' before spoutin' on the rules about disqualified entries?
Is a piece that hasn't appeared in a forum, or on a blog, or somewhere in UseNet limbo, more valuable than one that has? Well, not so anyone would notice any difference in their wallet, right? Not so anyone would notice on any level, is more like it.
If their rules are designed to their ego's specification, and are merely manifestations of fear and laziness, then they really do deserve the teeny, tiny audiences they have. Will always have.
OK, here's someone calling for you to do hoops for no real reward, try not to laugh in his face.
-blue
<< Home
