10 Writing Submission Strategies to Get You Published

November 16, 2017 | 6 min read

 


Today’s guest post is by editor and author Susan DeFreitas (@manzanitafire), whose debut novel, Hot Season, won the 2017 Gold IPPY Award for Best Fiction of the Mountain-West.


 

 

Some of the most brilliant writers fail to get published, and not because their work isn’t ready for publication, but because they fail to submit their work.

Maybe you’re one of them. Or maybe you’re one of those who submits a short story, essay, or query once in a blue moon, hoping for the best (but, more likely than not, getting rejected).

Or maybe you’ve developed a more systematic approach to submissions, but still have yet to break through with the byline or book deal you’ve been aiming for.

It might be that your work isn’t ready yet for publication; on the other hand, it might be that your current submissions strategy isn’t working.

In my 20+ years as a writer, and close to 10 now as an editor, I’ve learned a few things about the submissions process, and a few things about publishing too—and it’s my hope that what I’ve learned will help you develop a more efficient, more effective submissions strategy.

1. Double up

    Publishing is, at its heart, a numbers game; most literary journals and magazines receive a thousand or more submissions a year, with acceptance rates hovering between .5 and 2.5 percent.

    Those numbers should make it clear that in order to get results, no matter how brilliant your submission may be, you need to have your work under consideration in many different places. (Most literary journals allow for simultaneous submissions, which makes this easier; most genre magazines do not.)

    Of course, there are only so many hours in the day, week, month, and year, and if you’re already overloaded with other obligations, the responsibility to submit your work can seem overwhelming—even paralyzing.

    But there’s a simple trick to avoid that sort of paralysis: however many submissions you tend to have out at a time, double it. That means, if you have nothing currently under consideration, submit one thing; if you have a piece under consideration by five publications, submit to five more.

    2. Follow up

      New writers tend to take rejection hard; more experienced writers hardly notice it. But if you don’t take the time to read your rejections carefully, you may miss the fact it has been rejected with regrets.

      This is one of those “nice” rejections; it might mention that while the editors enjoyed the piece, they ultimately decided that it wasn’t right for their publication. Rejections like this often come with an invitation to submit more work.

      These kind of rejections can sting, sometimes more than the standard form letter (so close!). But it’s important to realize what the nice rejection letter really means.

      Kate Winterheimer, the founding editor of The Masters Review, notes that she has published many authors who had been previously rejected many times. “I can’t emphasize enough that continuing to submit to the same literary magazine is something you absolutely should do,” she says. “It’s terrible to think they might not submit to us again when their work is so close and such a strong fit, but has otherwise been beat out by other stories. We’ve published several authors who first received rejections from us.”

      If you love a publication, and the editors there love you, keep sending them your work.

      3. Periodically revise

        If you stopped to edit your work each and every time you sat down to send it out, you’d never send it out at all. (Writers are notorious perfectionists.) But if you’ve collected five or ten rejections on a piece, it might be time to revisit the piece with newer, fresher eyes and see if it might benefit from revision

        That revision might be structural—for instance, a new ending—or it might be cosmetic (almost any piece can benefit from a nip and tuck here and there). Either way, revisiting the piece may be the key to getting an acceptance in your next round of submissions.

        4. Send out polished work

          We all know the shiny allure of a just-finished piece—which seems to lack so many of the flaws of our earlier, less sophisticated work—and in the first flush of excitement, it can be tempting to send it out for consideration.

          This is a strategy that makes sense for topical, nonfiction (essays and articles), especially if it intersects with the current news cycle. But for fiction and poetry, that first flush of excitement often hides fundamental flaws that you would have caught during the process of revision.

          When in doubt, submit your most polished work—which, in general, tends to be older.

          5. Always be circulating.

            There are many writers who will do a big submissions push on an infrequent basis—say, once a year. One by one, the rejections roll in, and this writer lets them accrue until the piece is no longer in circulation.

            If this is all you can manage, great. But if you’re serious about getting published, it makes sense to observe what The Review Review terms, “the ABCs of lit mag publishing: always be circulating.”

            One way to achieve this goal is to submit on a one-to-one basis: for every rejection you receive, one submission goes out. (Want to level up even further? For every rejection you receive, submit to five more publications.)

            6. Do your research

              It’s great to have big ambitions for your work. But if you’ve been submitting for a while and have only been submitting to the top-tier publications, it might be time to reconsider your publications strategy.

              Everyone wants to be published by The New Yorker (or Asimov’s, as the case may be). But that means everyone is submitting to these publications too. On a purely statistical basis, you owe it to yourself to check out the publications that not everyone has heard of, and to get to know their work.

              There are so many high-quality, lesser-known publications out there, and many of them even pay a professional rate.

              7. Look for the limits

                Any factor that limits the number of submissions in a given slush pile is your friend.

                That limiting factor might be the fact that the journal is only open to submissions for a week twice a year. Or that the contest is only open to women under 35, or poets from upstate New York—or, even better female poets under 35 from upstate New York!

                Even as broad a category as gender has the potential to cut your competition in half—so, in surveying your submissions opportunities, look for the limits.

                8. Keep track

                  Does all of this sound like a lot to keep track of? It is.

                  Add in the number of times you’ve submitted a piece, its word count, some key words that might help in targeting submissions, and you’ve got a whole mess of information on your hands, which is why I recommend using a spreadsheet to track your submissions.

                  9. Submit early

                    We’re all busy people, which is why so many of us wait until close to the contest deadline or end of the submissions window to submit.

                    But editors and general readers are busy people too, which is why they generally do not wait until the contest or submissions window closes to start reading, and the way they read at the beginning of their journey through the slush is not the way they read at the end.

                    If you want to give yourself the best odds with a given contest or publication, send in your work as soon as submissions open.

                    10. Submit often

                      Finally, remember that submitting is an essential activity for every writer who aspires to be an author. It pays to stay abreast of new publication opportunities as they arise, and to submit work frequently enough that you can take advantage of those opportunities whenever they come your way.

                      --

                      Now it’s your turn. What are some of the submission strategies that have proven helpful to you? Let me know in the comments below.


                       


                      Author Susan DeFreitas

                      An author, editor, and educator, Susan DeFreitas’s creative work has appeared in (or is forthcoming from) The Writer’s Chronicle, The Utne Reader, Story, Southwestern American Literature, and Weber—The Contemporary West, along with more than twenty other journals and anthologies. She is the author of the novel Hot Season (Harvard Square Editions), which won the 2017 Gold IPPY Award for Best Fiction of the Mountain West. She holds an MFA from Pacific University and lives in Portland, Oregon, where she serves as an editor with Indigo Editing & Publications.

                       

                       

                       

                      Recommended articles

                      More recommended articles for you

                      September 05, 2024 7 min read

                      Everyone has a pandemic story because it's hard to forget. I remember the quickness of it all — societal norms flipping, turning, and somersaulting, which still makes my head spin. "Stuff is gonna get weird," I remember telling my friend. "Especially art."

                      August 29, 2024 4 min read

                      Right now, the choice for a writer to use artificial intelligence (AI) or not has been largely a personal one. Some view it as a killer of creativity, while others see it as an endless well of inspiration.

                      But what if, in the future, your choice had larger implications on the state of literature as a whole?

                      This is the question that’s being raised from a new study by the University of Exeter Business School: If you could use AI to improve your own writing, at the expense of the overall literary experience, would you?

                      Let’s explore some context before you answer.

                      The Set Up

                      The 2024 study recruited 293 writers to write an eight-sentence “micro” story. The participants were split into three groups:

                      • Writing by human brainpower only
                      • The opportunity to get one AI-generated idea to inspire their writing
                      • The opportunity to get up to five AI-generated ideas to inspire their writing

                      Then, 600 evaluators judged how creative these short stories were. The results confirmed a widely accepted idea but also offered a few surprising findings.

                      Prompts from AI Can Jumpstart the Creative Process

                      Right off the bat, the reviewers rated the AI-guided stories as being more original, better written, and more enjoyable to read. (Interesting to note that they did not find them funnier than the fully human-inspired stories.)

                      This actually isn’t that surprising. Most writers know the “blank page dread” at the beginning of a project. Even as I write this, I can’t help but wonder, “If I had been tasked with writing an eight-sentence story, what the heck would I have written about?”

                      Many writers share this sense of needing to pick the “right” story to tell. And that uniquely human concept of perfectionism can end up actually inhibiting our creative process.

                      A prompt, then, can help us quickly clear this mental hurdle. To test this, I’ll give you one, courtesy of ChatGPT: “Write a story about a teenager who discovers a mysterious journal that reveals hidden secrets about their town, leading them on an unexpected adventure to uncover the truth.”

                      Can you feel your creative juices flowing already?

                      Since its release, AI has been celebrated for its ability to assist in idea generation; and this study confirms how effective using artificial intelligence in this way can be for writers — some, it seems, more than others.

                      AI-Generated Ideas Helped Less Creative Writers More

                      It doesn’t feel great to judge a writer’s creative prowess, but for this study, researchers needed to do just that. Prior to writing their short stories, the writers took a test to measure their creativity.

                      Researchers found that those considered less creative did substantially better when given AI-generated ideas — to the point where getting the full five ideas from AI “effectively equalizes the creativity scores across less and more creative writers.”

                      This isn’t the case just for writing. Another study by the National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship WZ also found that AI tools most benefit employees with weaker skills.

                      So is AI leveling the playing field between okay and great writers? It seems it may be. But before we lament, there’s one more finding that proves using AI isn’t all perks.

                      AI-Aided Stories Were More Similar — And Needed to Be Credited

                      The researchers took a step back to look at all the AI-supported stories collectively. And what did they find?

                      The AI-assisted stories were more similar as a whole, compared to the fully human-written stories.

                      Additionally, when reviewers were told that a story was enhanced by an AI idea, they “imposed an ownership penalty of at least 25%,” even indicating that “the content creators, on which the models were based, should be compensated.”

                      This leads us to that all-important question about AI-assisted work: who owns the content?

                      According to Originality.AI, an AI and plagiarism detector, “When there’s a combination of AI and human-generated elements, the human elements may receive copyright protection if they meet the requirements.”

                      So right now, if a writer uses AI to generate ideas — but writes the content themselves — they retain rights to the work.

                      However, Originality.AI even admits that “the legal system is having a hard time keeping up” with the rapid adoption of artificial intelligence. Time will only tell what AI regulations will look like in a few years.

                      What Does an AI-Assisted Literary Future Look Like?

                      The researchers from the University of Exeter Business School study raise an interesting point about what the future landscape for writers may look like. If droves of authors begin using AI to come up with ideas, we may end up with a lot of well-written yet dime-a-dozen stories.

                      So will human beings choose the easier, but less diverse, path? Or will we stick to fighting through writer’s block armed with nothing but our own brain?

                      Or, a third option: can we somehow learn to harness AI to supercharge our writing process without sacrificing the wholly unique creativity that infuses human creation?

                      That’s one question that even ChatGPT can’t answer.

                      Editor's Note: Artificial intelligence may have already transformed writing, but that doesn't mean you shouldn't be in control of your own words. Read Astrohaus Founder Adam Leeb's statement on AI and privacy.

                      August 22, 2024 8 min read

                      While AI has capabilities that range from coding to image generation, the model that excites — and terrifies — writers is the LLM. It won’t be long before we see the world’s first blockbuster novel, written entirely by an LLM. What does this mean for art, and writers in particular? Is it all doom and gloom? The answer is, of course, more complicated than yes or no.