Content: Mostly fiction, but open to almost anything. Images should be in landscape form.

Style: Humor. Beautiful things. Tragickal things. Readable/unpredictable/quixotic as opposed to mundane/pity-seeking. Polished, but with no MFA signature.

Length: Prefer stories 5,000 words or less. It’s harder to be longer.

Submission Schedule: Erratic. Inbox-overflow-dependent.

Response Time: A few weeks.

Revision: We’re pretty happy to suggest revisions and work with authors.

Response Type: We try to give an atom of feedback. This hinges on quality, on how nice you are (but please be frank), on how “practical” you are (please don’t offload some 12K genre fantasia and expect us to take the magnifying glass to it), and on the orbit of the moons of Saturn. We think that it’s nicer to reject it and give a vague, cheesy reason—or maybe a specific but bad reason—rather than offer an insincere psy-op form rejection that makes it sound like we melted in our seats but that we’re already inundated with the second coming of lit. (Plus, feedback is the kind of “labor” that could be somewhat cringingly called a service to literature—not making a Christmas donation to [redacted] magazine.)

Museum Pieces: You might have a billowing appendage of vocabulary, but we’re not into difficulty contests. Some works are so impressive that they demand to be put behind glass and not actually read.

At the Same Time: We also are not optimistic about receiving uncut spools of hallucinations and facile fragments. We want people who feel comfy at their power level, but it has to be high enough.

Poetry: Poets are second-class citizens on Planet Tragickal, which seems evil, but really, they’re fifth-class citizens out in the wild and could use some Malthusian limits. (Poets have been exiled from the throne of aesthetics for decades.) We prefer poetry that has a strong narrative or metrical or rhetorical structure—something that hypnotizes when read aloud. We’re not into fizzy, ephemeral free-verse. We’ll look at poetry, but we’ll pass unless it has screen-rattling propulsion and truthfulness.

Vetting: We don’t have the resources or inclination to hire a data-mining psychiatrist to vet fans or writers associated with the site. We aim to avoid toxic people, but really, we don’t care about brands and people as much as works. It’s possible that someone is an asshole but a good writer. We might meet someone like that half-way a quarter of the way rather than shun them and engage in a modern witch-burning ritual over a microdose of wrongthink. Sorry. Consider this a libertarian planet of mostly wonderful but unknowable people. Don’t send us a message saying, “Hey, I really like ur site and want to submit!!! But activism is really close to my ♡ ♡ and I just want to know, do u believe everything in x, y, and z? Sorry to bother u but its important!!” Please. Don’t. We follow no ideological 1-drop rule. If you’re conflicted, then check out our archives and see if they’re pure enough for you. While we don’t traffic in shock culture, we’re not exactly allergic to the kind of controversial work that doubles as a tonic.