Over on Twitter, Magma (the renowned print-based poetry journal) have engaged positively in a debate about the cost of entering their pamphlet competition, which was 20 pounds. They've stated...
The brutal truth is that poetry magazines need competitions, grants etc to survive long term. Of course we'd rather sell more magazines...And we do have a reduced entry rate for our heroic band of subscribers who help to keep us going.
It's worth placing this quote in the context of a comment by Rob MacKenzie, the editor of Issue 79 of Magma, on a separate Twitter thread, in which he mentions the following
For Magma 79, we have between 5000 to 6000 poems submitted...
In my view, the brutal truth is not the need for competitions and grants. Instead, it's the huge disparity between the number of poets who submit and those who subscribe to print-based magazines. If just 10% of the poets who submitted to Magma were to subscribe, the journal would surely be self-sustaining. The key question is why they don't do so.
DISPLACED They called her aloof, impractical, clumsy, plain. It was, they
say, difficult for her not to fall in love.In spite, that is, of the first
coughs...
Although being a subscriber doesn't help you get poems into the magazine, it is psychologically easier to subscribe to a journal in which you've had poems than one where you never managed to get a look-in. The ones I subscribe to long term (when I think about it honestly) have all, at some point or other, published poems by me. And the ones where my sub lapses are ones where I've repeatedly failed to please, and have finally given up. This is probably not very laudable, but it could be typically human.
ReplyDeleteI very much agree, Nell, and I find it easier to identify with magazines that are personal projects rather than those that have rotating editors.
DeleteI'm as human as Nell. I've given up on Rialto. I'm not interested in several of the Magma themes, so I don't subscribe. I entered their pamphlet competition more as a monetary contribution than a thrust for glory. I've much more sympathy than hitherto for mags that charge for submissions. After all, being published is like winning a mini-competition, and in the past I'd happily pay for postage when sending to mags. And I know how much of a thankless slog reading submissions can be - when I stopped doing it, my production shot up.
ReplyDeleteI personally don't submit to mags that charge for submissions, nor those that refuse to give complimentary copies. I don't agree with either policy.
DeleteThere are several excellent journals that thrive without resorting to any of these tactics, and they're the outfits I try to back. Such mags are proof that high-quality, print-based magazines can be sustainable.
I don't think poetry journals charging for regular submissions is common in the UK, is it? I know it is in the US but I think it's because there's less arts funding there. And it's controversial there as well.
DeleteI understand why journals and publishers charge for entries to competitions, but I must admit it's another reason (not the only one) why I don't tend to enter poetry competitions.
Ambit charge, as do iota. And Poetry Review have a charge if you prefer to use Submittable instead of snail mail. Here's hoping it doesn't become a trend over here!
DeleteAs you say, charges for competitions are far more understandable. And I also share your stance in terms of not entering them!
FYI here's my penny's worth on paying for success - http://litrefs.blogspot.com/2020/08/paying-for-literary-success.html
ReplyDelete