In the early days of flipped eye publishing I saw every submission as a chance to enhance the experience that most aspiring writers have when they submit work to a publisher. I responded to every submission, telling each writer what I liked and didn’t like about their work, what could be improved easily, who I thought they should read, and what magazines to submit to. It was a tall order, but we were new and I was only editing three writers so I was able to keep up with it. Besides, I had been the submitting writer so many times and was so incensed when editors/agents/magazines who asked you NOT to make simultaneous submissions did not respond. I actually got several writers writing back to thank me – and, of course, submissions ballooned because that was effectively a FREE reading service.

Seven years on, I find myself editing twenty two writers, working with two extra editors and – yes – with no time to respond to all submissions. Admittedly, it crept up on me, so I didn’t actually take steps to let writers know of the changes (I do believe clear communication is the foundation of the contract, regardless of how transient, between editor and writer/aspiring writer), but we have ALWAYS said that we accept simultaneous submissions – after all, if an editor likes your work, they should step up and say so! And we don’t require SAEs, which I maintain are a waste of time – in fact, we prefer initial queries by e-mail.

What we have done now, though (a few years late), is create an auto-response that lets writers know EXACTLY what is likely to happen to their submission – where it goes. And the text reads something like this:

Your submission has been received by flipped eye publishing and will now go through a number of stages. You may or may not get a response depending, primarily, on whether or not your submission makes it beyond our initial readers. During low submission periods we endeavour to respond to all submissions, but we cannot promise this.

The stages are as follows:

1. Your submission is read by our initial readers, who will pick work that is well-structured, edited and presented and forward what they choose to our selection readers. LIKELIHOOD OF RESPONSE IF YOU DON’T MAKE IT PAST THE INITIAL READERS – 12%
2. Your submission is perused by our selection readers who will select work based on originality, style and the priorities of our three editors, sending the chosen work on to specific editors according to their assessment of the work. All fiction submissions will go to Nii Ayikwei Parkes. LIKELIHOOD OF RESPONSE IF YOU DON’T MAKE IT PAST THE SELECTION READERS – 30%
3. Your work is read by one of our three editors who then pick the work they like and share it with the other editors at our editorial meetings (held every six weeks). LIKELIHOOD OF RESPONSE IF YOU DON’T MAKE IT PAST AN EDITOR – 62%
4. Your work is championed by an editor at an editorial meeting. If it is approved, the editor who chose your work will contact you to discuss the possibility of publishing you. LIKELIHOOD OF RESPONSE IF YOU DON’T MAKE IT PAST THE EDITORIAL MEETING – 99%

So, we still love bits of your work – but we can’t always tell you which. We live in crunchy times…

»»

some of the jackets for the mouthmark pamphlet series

We also developed a distinctive look for the imprint which often has punters stopping for a second look at book fairs (samples on the right). The outcomes of the mouthmark pamphlet series initiative include press exposure in Straight No Chaser and the Independent on Sunday, a couple of PBS Pamphlet Choice Awards and – my love/hate outcome – a rush of submissions! More importantly, we noticed other publishers in the marketplace establishing similar initiatives. One of my favourites is the pilot series run by the tall-lighthouse – publisher of my chapbook M is for Madrigal. Launched in 2007 and edited by the ultra-talented Roddy Lumsden, the series aims to unearth young poetry talent in the UK and I believe it has already won three PBS Pamphlet Choice awards in its short life.

I believe the emergence of such well-managed, elegantly-designed pamphlet series meant that it was only a matter of time before an award such as the Michael Marks came along. Of course, the Poetry Book Society has been working on this for a while, but it’s always easier to close a deal when you have the quality to back it up. Now, the first award for publishers covers work published in 2008 and since mouthmark didn’t release any titles last year, my money is on the tall-lighthouse; Roddy has edited and groomed a truly amazing crop of writers and noone deserves it more.

To find out more about the awards, visit this link: http://www.bl.uk/news/2009/pressrelease20090203.html

The first thing I noticed was that he used very different language to communicate his feelings about a poem, was very humourous in his analogies and – of course – had very unique body language. But when it came down to it and I looked over the poems with his edits, he had edited them almost exactly the way I would, with the exception of the odd comma, full stop and ‘and’. I had a very similar experience with Jacob when we worked on a project last year, so I concluded it was no coincidence. That’s when I realised that our many years of sharing poetry – reading, discussing and critiquing – meant that we already have a kind of editiorial harmony going on; like a trio in a barbershop, cutting and trimming while making beautiful music. I can delegate with an easy heart – I love it when a plan comes together!  »»

Of course, it wasn’t to last. Soon I had seven authors and I was missing deadlines for x magazine (the latest issue is currently 7 months delayed). In another year we had won some accolades and the unsolicited manuscript volume became incredible. To give you some perspective, after we won our first PBS Pamphlet Choice we received forty manuscripts in two weeks. There was no way my old ways were going to survive – no way! It’s the very real trade off that has to happen as a small press grows in reputation and its backlist starts to demand administration hours.

So now, I respond to most MSS by e-mail if I get to it and if I don’t like the work I don’t bother responding – it’s way too much work. In some ways I have become the editors I thought treated me so unfairly, but I like to tell myself I’m different because I still feel guilty about not responding and I still write to anyone who sends me something I like – even if it’s not good enough for us yet. If I don’t like it… Well, it’s a rough world out there – sorry »»