I was speaking with some writer friends the other day about various professional markets which accept electronic submissions.
"Oh, it's wonderful," I said, "I love being able to send electronic manuscripts."
"Yeah," said somebody, "but the flip side is that I've heard people say, 'I was pretty sure that my story was bad, but I sent it anyway.' I mean, that's taking Don't Edit for the Editor a little too far." There followed tales of obvious first-draft stories submitted simply because submission was the click of a few buttons instead of a $5.27 visit to the post office. Then the conversation concluded with conjectures on which editor would be the last one to adopt on-line submissions.
At first I was going to comment here that sending sub-par manuscripts is simply disrespectful, not only to a magazine's editorial staff, but to yourself and your corpus of work.
Then I was going to say it seems like a good way to get slush readers to groan when they see your name at the top of a manuscript.
But the end result of writers too lazy to do another pass on manuscripts before hitting the Send Button-- the one that affects me and every other serious writer -- is that now when I get a rejection, I'm much more likely to get a form rejection.
Gee, thanks. Not that I expect editorial staff to critique, but it will make those very rare instances when they do take a moment to add additional comments all that more meaningful.
1 comment:
I agree. The ease of electronic submission means the barrier to entry has been lowered drastically, making your ms to float in an ever-growing sea of literary swill.
On the flip side, with all this crap being sent to editors or agents, we serious folks who our damnedest to create our very best look that much better in comparison.
Here's to being the pearls among swine.
Post a Comment