SUBURBAN SYNTAX

To simultaneous submit, or not to simultaneously submit? That is the question rant.

In between prepping my next novel (more on that soon), I’ve been submitting a number of short stories with my writer’s group. Diving back into that landscape after a brief hiatus, I’m noticing a particular trend. It’s always been there, but it seems particularly thorny at this point, given how rocky the current writing ecosphere is.

Grab your popcorn. This one is a hot take.

Hot-take disclaimer: I’m an author, and will always advocate for authors and writers. Take everything you read here with that implicit bias.

It seems recently that the size of submission queues for calls, as well as the response times, has grown. I attribute it to a number of factors. My guess is less functioning small outlets, and a glut of AI-generated work in slush piles, among other things.

My thoughts on AI are for a different blog post, and outlets have always come and gone, but there has been a number of high profile closings, and the number of markets shuttering on mailing lists seems to be growing faster than new ones can pop up to replace them.

More concerning than the long wait times, is the lack of responses. I’ve discussed with other writers, and there seems to be a recent trend of simply not hearing back. Not even with a form-letter rejection. I find this unacceptable.

Before you’re like “yeah, but giant slush piles!” I get it. I know and work with editors, and it’s grueling. A lot of effort for little-or-no pay, and it’s often a subjective labor of love. Plus, I’m sure they get lot of nasty responses from looneys who get their first ever “R”.

While I sympathize, I believe outlets should do their best to provide a form-letter rejection within a few weeks of their own deadline, or at the very least, incorporate language that says “if you don’t hear back, assume a rejection.” It’s enough of a slog tracking submissions and trying to follow-up on queries without ever hearing back. It’s why I use a spreadsheet to track all my active submissions. I believe it’s just one of those things a responsible outlet should do if they want to “be in the game.”

This brings me to the crux of the post. Simultaneous submissions. I’m always grateful when an anthology or lit mag allows simultaneous subs, but if they don’t? I do it anyway. ::gasp::

Why? Because I ain’t got that kind of time. It’s bad enough to never hear back, but limiting the size of the net you cast in the first place is worse. Acceptance rates are becoming more transparent, and for the outlets that have a 1-2% acceptance rate, well, I send everyone who doesn’t pick up a story a withdrawal letter.

Across many years, I’ve never had my wrist slapped, not even once. Was I secretly blacklisted from some magazines? Maybe. But they probably weren’t going to publish me anyway.

Again, I’m sure there are many writers who don’t send withdrawal requests, and outlets end up in a bad spot after picking up a good story only to discover someone else got it first. I truly do sympathize with that. However, a journal or call asking a writer to sit on a story for 3-8 months while they read it and have a 1% chance of publication? That’s a tall ask for everyone who is trying to get their work out. From speaking with other writers, I was surprised to discover how many others do this as well, and the outlets know it.

There is just this “wink to the audience” that you risk getting black-listed if you do it, which is a very unlikely scenario.

This falls under the same category as submission fees or “reading fees” which I’ve railed against in the past, and have thankfully fallen by the wayside for the most part. I believe editorial staff should get paid. But some of the premiere outlets asking those fees have a 0.8-1% acceptance rate, which means they are simply harvesting dollars from the hopeful for the privilege of getting a rejection letter or never hearing back. I cannot abide by that. The author creates the work that allows the outlet to exist.

I realize this is a bit of a disorganized rant, and in a perfect world both editors and writers would always be on their best behavior so we wouldn’t need to worry about simultaneous submissions. However, this oddly symbiotic relationship is the best we’ve got, and I’m going to side with the writers on this one (but I already told you I would).

I’m curious to hear your thoughts. I know I have both authors and editors who follow this blog. What has your experience been with simultaneous submissions? Do you think they are a good idea, or that outlets should have the time to work a slush pile down without fear of someone else grabbing rights to that excellent story first?

Let me know in the comments!