I will admit to being angry as I write this. I feel I have a right to be. I tend to get this way, almost every time I spend an hour or two scouring websites of literary publications, for places to submit some of my own work. Perhaps this time I got slightly more unlucky than others, perhaps not, I don't know, but I do know I am appalled at the stance the majority of publications (mostly, but not exclusively, the better established ones) take. I am appalled that this is considered "acceptable", appalled that it seems as if no-one else seems to mind.

First, the "no e-mail submissions" policy. Why the hell not?! Isn't it about time those publications realized what age it is we live in? What I ask, is the point of taking away by far the simplest and easiest way of written communication between any two parties today?

I'm not even going to get into the "we do not currently accept poetry submissions", or the "at present time, our poetry submission policy is by invitation only" league. Why should I even give the time of day to a publication with an editorial policy that narrow minded and short-sighted?

How many times, while reading the submission guidelines to a given publication must I feel like I am being talked down to and patronized? How many times must I read the offhand "all [...insert the editor's current pet hate here...] submissions will be binned without notice"? I'm at a loss as to what they feel actually gives them the right to take this line of tone. Why must I see statements such as "be prepared to wait for months for a reply..."? F*** you, "be prepared to wait for months". I'm sorry, but I truly cannot fathom this. And as you can probably tell, I feel rather strongly about it all.

The bottom line, is that I just do not see any excuses for the above idiocies as truly acceptable. If too many submissions is the problem, hire more people. If lack of time is the problem, hire more people. If lack of funds is the problem, it's not like there aren't plenty of qualified and competent individuals out there willing to donate their time free of charge. How many of us get paid for doing this, anyway? Lack of effort, seems to be the real problem then. And the publications guilty of this, are not fulfilling their commitment as editors, publishers, whatever it is they wish to call themselves, as far as I'm concerned. I mean, look at the situation here: "we've grown large enough to no longer care about treating the people who provide us with our content in the first place, with any degree of respect. We do not need you any more." What other business, or enterprise in the world today, is allowed to get away with this kind of policy? If a large car dealership took the stance of "sorry, we have so many customers already to deal with... You'll just have to wait a couple of months for us to order your new car in..." Would you give them your business? As enterprises grow, they make moves to accomodate both the people who are responsible for, and those who reap the benefits of that growth. Everywhere but in the publishing industry, it seems.

There are quality publications out there, both large and small, web and print, who treat their contributors with the degree of courtesy and respect I feel should be expected. At times, more than would be expected. I come across them now and again, but it is so frustrating to find them by far more the exception than the rule.

I urge all contributors, writers, poets, to wake up! Do not accept shoddy treatment. It is not how things should be. Without you, "they" are nothing. Be selective to where you submit. Do not allow yourselves to be treated with all the consideration reserved for a swarm of flies. You have a right to expect replies within a reasonable amount of time. A right to expect them to make submitting for you as simple and painless as possible. Act like it. It is the only way things are ever going to change.

On to this month's issue. As you can see, it is a little lacking in volume. Something I've been dreading ever since issue one: what if I simply do not receive enough quality submissions one month? Well, so it has happened. I've said in the past that I would publish an issue with only two quality poems in it if I had to. So I guess I am sticking to that, rather than holding the issue back as has been suggested to me, and as I have also considered. What's the value of a poem? Are ten poems worth more than one?

Also, I've once again decided to include a couple of my own pieces. This still does not sit quite right somewhere inside me, and I don't think I'm ever going to come to a definite decision on whether I feel this is "ok" or not. It feels like an an obvious step to solving, in part, the "lack of volume" problem, and I try to justify it in my head by the thought that it gives people who come here to read, something more. An obvious example of dealing with cognitive dissonance, I'm sure, but who am I to really know what's going on inside me? I've tried to choose pieces which I feel confident about, and which in addition have received positive feedback elsewhere.

Thanks go to Mary Beth Lowes for once again supplying the drawing for the cover, and as always, to all contributors and readers. Hope you'll enjoy the issue.

Mark Melton
Editor,
3rd Muse Poetry Journal