Browse: Home / / Scam Of The Spindle

Scam Of The Spindle

By Robert Swartwood on February 6, 2011

I just got home from AWP. It was a great and fun time, and I plan to do a more in-depth post later in the week, but first I needed to share something. Actually, before I do, I should mention my love for Narrative Magazine. You know just how close Narrative and I are, right (see here, and here, and here)? So being the smart-ass that I am, as I wandered around the book fair I tweeted:

As it turns out, they were not in attendance at the conference. Why? Who the hell knows. My theory is a) they’ve come to realize most people dislike them or b) they had no extra money for a table because fewer and fewer authors are submitting or c) they knew I was going to be there. Not sure about anybody else, but I’m leaning toward the third theory … or the first … or hell, all of them sound good.

So anyway, Narrative wasn’t in attendance, which was just as well, because over the weekend I learned of another publishing faux pas, one that, I think, even outdoes Narrative‘s ridiculous bullshit. You see, I heard that the web journal Prick of the Spindle had opened submissions for a new print edition. So what do I do, the web-savvy writer that I am? I go online and check out the guidelines of course! And saw this:

Prick of the Spindle is a literary journal that is open to forms in both traditional and experimental modes, with a special bent toward fresh and innovative voices using language in unique ways. We read for issues year-round. If you are interested in being considered for publication in Prick of the Spindle, please take care to read the guidelines for submitting your previously unpublished work.

The online edition of Prick of the Spindle is published quarterly. Online content is also made available for the Kindle magazine incarnation of the journal. The print edition of Prick of the Spindle is published biannually.

There is no reading fee for the online edition, and submissions are accepted year-round (for reading fees for the print edition, please see the end of this page or the submission manager guidelines). We do send a courtesy e-mail notifying authors that we have received their submission; if you do not hear from us with a decision within three months of submitting, please feel free to send a query.

See what they did there? If not, read those three paragraphs again. Go ahead, I’ll wait. Back already? Yes, you read that right. There are reading fees for the print edition. And those fees are …

If you are submitting by mail, please indicate whether you wish to submit to the online or print edition of the journal. Keep in mind that it is free to submit to the online journal (a quarterly publication) but that if you wish to submit to the (biannual) print edition, you must include the appropriate fees. Fees for the print edition are as follows:

Poetry: $15, up to 5 poems
Fiction: $15, one story
Nonfiction: $10, one story
Essays & Articles: $15, one essay or article
Reviews: $10, one review
Drama: $10 one dramatic work
Art: $10, up to 5 pieces

Checks or money orders should be made payable to Prick of the Spindle.

So it’s almost as bad as Narrative, right? Actually, I would say no. Because while Narrative charges $20 reading fees, they actually pay their contributors (most of which, I believe, are solicited, and who, I believe, do not pay any reading fees). But this new print edition of Prick of the Spindle? As far as I can tell based on the guidelines, there is no payment. Not even a mention of a contributor’s copy or even a free PDF of the finished work.

Yesterday I e-mailed Cynthia Reeser, the journal’s editor-in-chief and founder, asking if there would be any payment for accepted pieces for the print edition, but have not heard back yet. And quite honestly, even if it turns out they do pay something, I would say it is in every writer’s best interest to stay far away from Prick of the Spindle. Which is sad, because I know a lot of talented people associated with this journal, and a stupid and greedy decision forever tarnishes the entire thing.

EDIT: Reeser says “We are not greedy.” Check out how “Ignorance Breeds Contempt” here.

Posted in | 22 Responses

  • http://www.alecbryan.com Alec Bryan

    I know Cynthia, and I back her one hundred percent on her comments. I happen to be familiar with Narrative as well. I would be willing to wager that in five years, Prick of the Spindle will wipe its ass with Narrative and your cockiness in both tone and style makes me want to kick your dumbwood ass.

    [Reply]

    Robert Swartwood Reply:
    February 7th, 2011 at 5:30 pm

    I know you feel you need to defend Cynthia because she’s your friend, but do you honestly believe these outrageous reading fees are justified? If so, you’re more than just delusional. You’re insane.

    [Reply]

    Alec Bryan Reply:
    February 7th, 2011 at 6:52 pm

    A little bit, yes (Insane). Cynthia can defend herself. I just find the entire tone of your article demeaning, especially your edit. I do agree I stooped to boorish means, and for that–apologies (I was listening to Eminem at the time). But, the online remains free, and for those who wish to pay to have their words forever etched in print, that’s their decision. On Cynthia’s own link, I did mention two dollars for reading fees because three is the cost of a good beer, and therefore, can be used in other ways, but I also understand why the prices. They have no backing. She is trying this on her own, and based on her success with the online, I believe she will find a way to make her print journal work as well, even if it requires some changes. Thanks for talking sense to me Roxane, with one “N”. You rock.

    [Reply]

    Robert Swartwood Reply:
    February 7th, 2011 at 7:14 pm

    In retrospect, I probably shouldn’t have included the edit with her e-mailed reply. I’ve since taken it out.

    I enjoy print journals just as much as web journals, though sometimes I wonder why writers would want to be in print journals, as the bigger readership will be online (unless, of course, it’s a journal like The Paris Review or The New Yorker or Harper’s … and though a writer’s work may forever be in print, there is always limited print runs with limited readership). I understand the need to raise funds for different projects, but I believe that are better way of going about it instead of instituting high reading fees. The writer/journal should have a nice balance of give and take, but sometimes it appears to be just all take. I really don’t have any problems with Cynthia as a person or her journal; my main beef is simply the outrageous reading fees.

    Alec Bryan Reply:
    February 7th, 2011 at 8:15 pm

    I guess I have always taken criticism hard. Wrong profession, ehh. Perhaps, you, seeing you are gifted, could suggest alternatives, answers–then Cynthia and those who appreciate her would honor your views, not that criticism doesn’t reserve it’s place in the profession, and they would say, “Now that is a good idea!”

    Nick Mamatas Reply:
    February 7th, 2011 at 5:45 pm

    That would be a rejoinder worthy of a paid submission…were Rob’s surname SMARTwood.

    It’s Swartwood, as in dark wood. Dumbass.

    [Reply]

    Robert Swartwood Reply:
    February 7th, 2011 at 8:40 pm

    My suggestion would be to look at what the guys at Electric Literature did. Granted, they’re a rare case, but they thought outside the box, got the right investors, and seem to be doing very well for themselves. I can pretty much guarantee that had they started out with high reading fees (or any reading fees at all), they would not be where they are now.

    [Reply]

  • Roxane

    Alec you’re a great writer and I understand your instinct to defend your publisher but Robert’s concerns are valid. This submission fee structure is absolutely insane. It is one thing to have a submission fee of $5 or less but asking $10 or $15 per submission to produce a print issue because you have no other way of sustaining your operating costs is something most people are going to have a problem with. Every editor has the right to do as they see fit with their magazine but there are going to be reactions to that kind of a free structure, plain and simple. There’s no need to resort to personal insults. You’re better than that and Robert deserves better than that.

    [Reply]

  • http://www.trachodon.org John

    I grant you $15 is a little steep, although I have heard that Prick of the Spindle does in fact plan to pay its writers for the print edition, and submissions for the web journal remains free. What’s being glossed over in Robert’s original posting, however, is the reason more and more journals are resorting to submission fees: writers have stopped subscribing to lit journals, and too often seem unwilling to pay even a five-spot for a sample copy. This means that publishers have been forced to find alternate sources of revenue, and now that print advertising has pretty well dried up, submissions are about all that’s left. If you want submission fees to go away, encourage writers to spend at least half their yearly book budgets on journal subscriptions and sample copies. If all writers care about is getting published, be prepared to pay submission fees to more and more places.

    [Reply]

    Nick Mamatas Reply:
    February 7th, 2011 at 6:20 pm

    So, it’s just a given that none of these journals would have any readers who weren’t would-be submitters? In such a case, there’s no reason for any of them to exist at all.

    [Reply]

    Robert Swartwood Reply:
    February 7th, 2011 at 7:23 pm

    I’ve talked about this here: http://www.robertswartwood.com/insights/in-the-valley-of-lost-literary-journals/ and here: http://www.robertswartwood.com/insights/the-cost-of-literary-art.

    There are just way too many print journals for any one writer to subscribe to at the same time. The costs to do so would be astronomical. Instead of subscribing to just one or two journals, I liked what one writer suggested and spread out the money to buy single issues of a varieties of journals. The truth is, though, it seems many journals are only read by writers. The casual everyday reader isn’t picking up the latest issue of Black Warrior Review, unfortunately.

    My main point is there are other ways of funding print magazines than just having reading fees. Especially very high reading fees.

    I also think more and more journals plan on charging for submissions because a) it will help keep the “amateur” writers away (their rationalization, at least) and b) Submishmash (a service I do happen to like a lot) has been encouraging journals to charge by using their service; because the more journals who charge using Submishmash, the more Submishmash makes in the end.

    [Reply]

    Roxane Reply:
    February 7th, 2011 at 7:26 pm

    Well, that’s the thing. Everyone wants a journal but wants some magic money tree to make that journal happen. If you cannot pay for your journal you cannot have one. It is just lunacy to expect writers to pay for you to be an editor. I don’t rant and rave about submission fees but at the end of the day, if you have that much of a hard on to have a print journal, save your money until you can afford the printing, apply for grants, do a Kickstarter (ill-advised for operating costs), etc etc etc.

    Submishmash is awesome but yes, it is pretty troubling that they are so intent on encouraging magazines to charge for submissions.

    [Reply]

    John Reply:
    February 7th, 2011 at 9:14 pm

    It’s true that most journal readers–probably 75%-90%–are writers, actively submitting their work. As an editor and founder of a journal, (and as a writer) I’m not bothered by this at all, for reasons which I get into below. What does bother me, however, is that less than 1 in 100 submitters buys a copy. A few have seen the magazine, but we’re still very new–it’s impossible that everyone who’s submitted has read the thing. This, I think, is a huge problem: writers obviously want to be published in Trachodon, but don’t want to, or aren’t willing, to throw a few bucks our way. Reading fees force them to, which isn’t nice, but is the route many of us have to go.

    Journals are literary breastfeeding. Most writers who successfully find agents and/or book editors do so with a strong list of publications in journals, and quite often as a direct result of a journal publications. We send several dozen issues of Trachodon to agents, editors, etc., not to mention that we’re connecting writers to a reading public, small as it may be. Each writer (and editor) has to decide when fees become too much, but given everything that journals do for writers, isn’t it worth it to keep ‘em around?

    [Reply]

    John Reply:
    February 7th, 2011 at 9:34 pm

    P.S. The posts Robert linked to above are excellent.

    Robert Swartwood Reply:
    February 7th, 2011 at 11:09 pm

    Another issue worth noting is that some (many?) writers will simply burn through the listings on Duotrope and send off submissions blindly. They may glance at the guidelines, but probably never any of the sample stories. So instead of taking the extra few minutes to do so, they submit a story completely not right for a particular market and waste not only their time but the editor’s (or slush reader’s or whoever’s) time as well. And then, of course, they get upset when their stories get rejected. Sometimes it’s a wonder that anybody would want to edit a magazine in the first place.

    Katy Reply:
    November 19th, 2011 at 9:18 pm

    Why buy when you can read free at the library?

  • http://jeremydbrooks.com Jeremy D Brooks

    Sounds like the backstage chatter at the VMmotherfuckin’As…I see a bi-coastal lit war brewing. Showdown in Vegas, flash fiction and handguns, yo.

    I’ve been scratching my head trying to think of a strong position and intelligent response to this whole thing, and I ain’t coming up with much–other than this:

    As a writer, I don’t pay for reviews, I don’t sign agreements to buy copies of my own books from a publisher, and I don’t submit to pay-to-play markets. Not that I’m anyone of note, but I don’t think I’m alone in this.

    As a reader…well, she can set up her magazine any way she wants…obviously. I know times is tough all over here in storyland, and I, just like everyone else, am limiting the number of magazines/books that I buy; and I’m so goddamn busy that I don’t read online very often either. That said: if I’m sitting on my computer itching to buy one journal/mag for the month, I’m probably less likely to fall down on the side of the one whose business model I disagree with, particularly a new title.

    [Reply]

  • Ryan Ridge

    Smart article, Mr. Smartwood! Sounds like Prick of the Spindle needs to change their name to Pricks of the Spindle. (Sorry, I couldn’t resist.) I, too, am aghast by the new trend of journals charging submission fees. It’s gross and reminds me of the 80s glam metal scene. Kurt Cobain wrote a song about it called “Pay to Play.” Fuck that noise. Personally I would never work for or submit to a journal that charges a fee. Unless it’s a contest. I’m all for contests. Contests are fine. Anyway, the way to get people buying journals is to offer good content. I’m thinking of places like Artifice, PANK, Sleepingfish, A Public Space, Upstairs at Duroc, Salt Hill, etc. Places I plop down my dollars to read––and none of these places fleece their writers up front with submission fees. It’s sad state of affairs.

    [Reply]

    Ryan Ridge Reply:
    February 8th, 2011 at 3:42 am

    Regardless, Aqueous Books is awesome! Great catalog. I came across dickish in my last post. Sorry.

    [Reply]

  • http://frankiesachs.blogspot.com Frankie

    I actually posted this to the comments on “Ignorance Breeds Contempt” but I have no idea if it’ll be approved or not (I didn’t paypal any money with it), and since I spent all that time typing it…

    I hope it’s not in violation of anyone’s simultaneous submissions policy.

    ——

    It doesn’t matter either way to me if and what you charge to read people’s work. It doesn’t tickle my ideology or anything.

    That said, I don’t pay reading fees. Like, ever.

    Here’s my rationale: paying to be read is stupid and backward. What you’re paying for is a publishing “credit” lotto, which from a litzine is pretty much worthless outside of two people who go “Oooh, I am so envious I will write snotty things about your story on my blog because have been trying for years to get in there.” Nobody cares, but the writer. (Not that there aren’t a couple places that I’d be tickled pink to get an acceptance from. But I recognize it for what it is–all about me.)

    The whole point of being published is to reach readers, which we can all do via zines that don’t charge, or by setting up a blog and a Smashwords account if those notorious gatekeepers won’t let us play in their sandboxes.

    Why would I spend fifteen bucks on a shot at what is essentially an ego stroke credit (“See ma! They like me, they really like me!”) when I could spend that fifteen bucks on two to five indie ebooks, or a subscription to a zine, or some back issues? Something where I get value for the money and support the writers or projects?

    You do what you’ve gotta to get by, and it’s a whack time in the publishing world, top to bottom. Kudos on trying to figure out a way to move forward, but I think you’re looking the wrong direction. You should be figuring out how to get the readers (many of whom will also be writers and potential contributors) to buy in to paying for your product, their entertainment.

    You know, in my opinion.

    [Reply]

  • Katy

    I was just accepted to POTS, but I don’t have a problem with the tone of this post (I thought it was rather funny.) and I also object to submission fees. I think it cheapens the publication, which is why I only submitted to POTS’s online journal. That said, there are still some good reasons to be in print, the main one being that print still carries more prestige when it comes to applying for certain types of grants and awards, such as the NEA.

    [Reply]

  • Katy

    There’s also The Cafe Review, which charges $1 for submissions.

    [Reply]