The Dirty Underbelly of Zoetrope

In response to my post launching the Zoetrope Boycott, a former reader for the publication weighed in with his/her less than encouraging report, including an admission that less than three stories had been plucked from the slush pile in over six years, and that even the short stories he recommended were lost/ignored/mishandled.

If you'll permit me do to some math, let's add up the (rumored) 25,000 slush pile manuscripts received per year and multiply that by six years - 150,000. Three were chosen in those six years - 3 out of 150,000. So if you send in a story, the percentage accepted stands at about .002%. But even that is not as disturbing as what the commenter alleges happens to the recommended stories. If the editors don't care what their readers think is good, why are they accepting submissions?

So, the Boycott continues, as long as Zoetrope pretends to be giving credence to the unknown writer.

But, on the upside, there are a lot of journals out there that deserve your financial and narrative support. Check out Duotrope to figure out which journals will get back to you in a proper amount of time, and also which ones actually publish manuscripts from the slush pile.

Comments

[Brent]

Depressing. Zoetrope is obviously bad, but how many other big name journals are like this, just to a lesser degree? I bet many publish less than 1% of slush pile submissions.

[John]

The problem is not that they publish less than 1% (or even 1 out of every 50,000) because you're right, many journals publish a small percentage, and that's good - they have to act as the gatekeepers (otherwise we'd be reading even more mediocre fiction). The problem is that while obstensibly welcoming slush pile submissions, they clearly ignore the selections of the readers who have dug through the slush pile and come up with the best material.

[Brent]

Yes, you're right. I guess the difficulty of finding something good breeds apathy. It was also illuminating when the Zoetrope reader stated that she didn't think the editors trusted their literary judgement enough to publish a no-name. That seems silly. But then again, how many no-names sell journals? How many "names" sell journals?