A complaint about (some) literary journals
The editors of literary journals have a right to print whatever they like, and to limit what they will consider; that should go without saying. But as a person who writes quite a bit of formal poetry (perhaps a third of my output), I'm increasingly annoyed by some of the submission requirements I see from editors:
Free verse only.
I get it--you don't care for formal verse, but that is so limiting for your readers, not to mention for poets.
No rhyming poetry.
This limitation, I'm quite sure, comes from a fear of receiving "greeting card" verse as submissions. But it also prevents formal poets from submitting any number of quality pieces, and it just isn't fair. It also implies that all rhyming poetry is lacking in quality, which is far from true.
We accept formal poetry (meaning, it has rhyme and meter).
This is just ignorance. Much formal poetry has meter and no rhyme (blank verse, for example), and some formal poetry has neither, or at least, does not require either (haiku and sestina would be examples). I'm seeing this restriction more frequently these days, and it tells me all I need to know about the editors; they simply do not understand what formal poetry is.
(Aside from those complaints about how editors treat formal poetry, I also feel let down when I see submission guidelines that incorporate poor grammar and syntax. Unfortunately, that now includes almost all of the guidelines I read.
Free verse only.
I get it--you don't care for formal verse, but that is so limiting for your readers, not to mention for poets.
No rhyming poetry.
This limitation, I'm quite sure, comes from a fear of receiving "greeting card" verse as submissions. But it also prevents formal poets from submitting any number of quality pieces, and it just isn't fair. It also implies that all rhyming poetry is lacking in quality, which is far from true.
We accept formal poetry (meaning, it has rhyme and meter).
This is just ignorance. Much formal poetry has meter and no rhyme (blank verse, for example), and some formal poetry has neither, or at least, does not require either (haiku and sestina would be examples). I'm seeing this restriction more frequently these days, and it tells me all I need to know about the editors; they simply do not understand what formal poetry is.
(Aside from those complaints about how editors treat formal poetry, I also feel let down when I see submission guidelines that incorporate poor grammar and syntax. Unfortunately, that now includes almost all of the guidelines I read.
Comments
Post a Comment