The Third Reader Submission Review Process and Philosophy
"Your submission doesn't fit our needs at this time." "Sorry, this is not for us."
Aren't those about the most frustrating things a writer can be told? We think so. That's why, when we planned to start Third Reader, we decided that we weren't going to dismiss the hard-working and creative writers who sent us their work with generic, politically-correct, non-specific rejections. Instead of looking down on writers as the "unwashed, untalented masses," we wanted to treat them the way we, as writers ourselves, would like to be treated – with respect. If one of us is rejected, we'd like to know why. Perhaps we can use that knowledge to improve the piece and our writing in general. Perhaps not. But either way, we believe that after the enormous effort that goes into creating our work, we should be given some clue as to why the piece was not accepted.
Why Do They Do It That Way?
What the editors of virtually every literary journal will say is that they are already overwhelmed with submissions and don't have the time or resources to respond to every writer. There is much truth in that, but those nauseatingly PC rejections give many writers the impression their work was completely inadequate, or was merely glanced at by an intern before being dismissed. Those little rejection slips or e-mails also make it look as though editors view writers as potential nut jobs, who will threaten mayhem if any kind of criticism is offered, even positive. This lack of communication leaves the writer in the dark. You can't know if the decision was sound or completely arbitrary. For all you, as the writer, know, the editor could have thought your character development was weak; or she was just having a bad day and rejected everything that came across her desk; or a piece from a better-known author came in and bumped you from the issue. Perhaps your piece was very close to being selected. Maybe one or two editors championed it, but couldn't get the group or the final decision-maker to go along. You would have loved to have known that, wouldn't you?Why We Do It Our Way
When an editor reads a story, he develops an opinion about it. If the journal is legit, that opinion is based on a decent amount of writing and editing experience, and maybe even some formal training. Since the opinion exists, why shouldn't the writer hear it? After all, that's part of what the writer is looking for when he or she submits. The real question then is: how easily can the editor transfer that opinion to the journal's web site? Fortunately, Third Reader has an incredible web guy (and sometime writer), Richard Decker, who has designed a system that allows each editor to easily make comments on every piece we receive. Those comments can only be seen by the other editors and the person who submitted the work. So there's really no excuse not to share our opinions with you. And by doing so we may help make you a better writer – we know it will make us better editors.So Here's What We Promise
The editors at Third Reader promise to be honest in our critiques of your work. We will try to be positive and constructive. If we see a way for the piece to be improved, we will suggest it. If we see something that doesn't work, we'll let you know.Our comments may be only a line or two, or they may be lengthy and detailed. We may not comment at all on a submission (this is rare, though). Whatever we say, you are allowed to agree or disagree. You can respond to our editors on your personal submission pages.
The final decisions about the stories and poems we run is made by the editors as a group. We debate, lobby and argue until a consensus is achieved. We won't deny that a certain amount of personal reaction to some submissions (positive or negative) may influence our decisions beyond our knowledge of writing. But in our critiques, we'll always try to adhere to literary theory.
Just to let you know, if our site gets to be too popular and starts to overwhelm us, we may have to put a limit on the number of stories and poems we can handle per issue and close submissions early. But it's not a problem yet.