How literary journals can scream "Hey, we're irrelevant!"

So the literary journal Tin House has announced that under their new submission policy, "Unsolicited submissions must be accompanied by a receipt for a hardcover or paperback from a real-life bookstore." What's that, you say? There's no bookstore in your area or you prefer digital books. Well don't worry--the editors will also accept grovelling from authors explaining "why he or she cannot go to his or her neighborhood bookstore, why he or she prefers digital reads, what device, and why" if it is done in a literarily acceptable manner.

As Tin House editor Rob Spillman explained, "We believe that there are more people who want to be published in literary magazines and small presses than there are people buying these magazines and books. This program is not meant as the solution. There is no one solution."

Actually, there is a solution. It's called finding a better way to connect your books with the people who want to buy them. Instead of equating the purchase of digital books with people not purchasing books at all, find a way to reach the growing audience for e-books. And while I love in-person bookstores, the simple truth is there's not a brick and mortar bookstore in everyone's community. That's one reason why online bookstores have done so well of late.

I totally understand the dynamic behind Tin House's submission push. And if writers aren't also readers, then they damn well won't make it as a writer. But to pretend that digital books and online bookstores are on the same level as people not buying books, well, all that screams is that your literary journal has found itself on the road to being irrelevant in our digital age--and doesn't know how to chart a new course.

Comments

[Clgidney]

What a bunch of pretentious twaddle. Indie bookstores are dying....
I don't see why a receipt from B&N and Borders (which also have eBook devices connected to them) really doesn't solve their concerns....

[Eric]

If Tin House is "privileging" brick-and-mortars, I think it's mostly out of a perception that physical bookstores are in greater need of their "charity."

That said, the whole thing strikes me as well-intentioned but gratingly moralizing. I mean, yeah, I spend too much money on books and want to see the literary community thrive, I believe in being part of a dialogue, but a writer doesn't have a responsibility to do or want or believe those things just because they're trying to sell their work. I understand that it must be frustrating to get more submissions than subscriptions, but it's not the outrageous or appalling equation that editors occasionally make it out to be. People want to sell you their product. They don't always want to buy yours. Them's the breaks. Asking folks to demonstrate or justify their lifestyle, even with good intentions and a tongue-in-cheek tone, is more than a little creepy.

[Jamison]

As a writing teacher who finds that the majority of students majoring in creative writing don't read, it's hard to have a problem with this. I ask students who some of their favorite writers are. Most of them can't think of one. That's more than a little creepy. If you have a problem with this, don't submit to Tin House. Big deal. There's only ten thousand other literary magazines. I'm all for this, and understand completely where they're coming from.

[Williamtvandemark.wordpress.com]

Jimmy Chen at HTMLGiant.com has a solution. He created a receipt you can print out. ROFL.

http://htmlgiant.com/web-hype/htmlgiant-custom-made-receipt-for-submitting-to-tin-house/

[SMD]

Well, I'll now officially remove them from my wish list then. Sounds pretty much like the same BS Poetry.com used to do. "Hey, we'll publish your poem, but you have to buy the book from us."

Utter stupidity. I will be podcasting about it.

[SMD]

And because I feel like double-posting: the irony is that if this whole ordeal blows up, they'll get the exposure among digital readers they are apparently missing or failing to grasp...just not in the way they expected or wanted...