LETTER

This conversation between Sara Fretz-Goering and Michael A. King unfolded by e-mail in January 2004. To honor the concerns raised by Sara and several other potential writers, submission guidelines have been revised in an effort to signal space limitations yet be more welcoming. See current submission guidelines on p. 47 in this issue, or www.CascadiaPublishingHouse.com/dsm/submit.htm.

Sara: Dear Editors: This is a note in response to Michael A. King’s editorial in the last issue of DreamSeeker Magazine (Winter 2004). There King asks, "So where are the women writers? Are they perhaps still less likely than men, so trained to speak up from day one, to claim their rightful public voices? Do they prefer to speak in other venues?"

On the information page regarding submissions to DSM is the following quote: "However, the limited space available in a quarterly magazine does not allow us routinely to accept unsolicited material. Thus we are not actively inviting submissions and are tending to publish submissions by our regular columnists and contributors or material we solicit (emphasis added). But we do aim to treat unsolicited submissions respectfully and are occasionally able to accept them."

I have not tried to publish my work (other than through an occasional letter to national magazines) but this particular blurb does not encourage me in any way to submit any of my work to your periodical. So, for any woman out there writing to a specific audience, one wonders how she will become a "regular columnist or contributor" unless she has the necessary contacts.

I just find it rather ironic that you ask where the women writers are, but send a rather cryptic message that really there is no space for new writers unless you know who we are. So yes, your article did spark something in me and touch a nerve.

Thanks for the thoughtful articles you are publishing. There is always a need for more venues for young and old writers with creative ideas.

Michael: Dear Sara, am I rightly understanding that you’re sending this response as a letter to the editor? If so, we’ll be glad to print it. I’m considering adding some such editor’s note as the following beneath your letter, but glad to see what you think and to consider publishing several go-rounds of discussion, depending on how you react. Thanks for your good comments.

§

In her insightful reply, Sara Fretz-Goering does accurately interpret our submissions wording (from our website) as discouraging new writers. This is intentional, not because we don’t want new writers but because we truly can only publish a modest number of articles, thus the hope is that our cryptic message will in fact discourage all but those persistent writers who are determined to be heard, since if we encouraged a flood of submissions we’d simply have to reject most of them due to lack of space.

Our intent is certainly not to discourage a particular type of writer—such as women—from submitting articles. And we actually work more proactively to invite submissions from women than from men, because we typically have more than enough articles in hand from men.

In light of this, does Sara’s observation continue to raise the question of whether men are more prepared to insist on being heard, so that they insist on pushing past even our discouraging submissions guidelines (as a good many of them do)? If so, we need to keep thinking through how our guidelines can signal the reality of our limited space without setting up a dynamic that may end up favoring the gender more prepared to elbow its way in. Or are we now trafficking in dangerous stereotypes?!

§

Sara: Sure, Michael, you may feel free to publish my "letter." Had I known it might be printed, I would have probably anguished over every word as I tend to do in my poetry. Ah well. I fired it off in a bit of uncharacteristic indignation for me. . . . I usually weigh things pretty heavily before speaking. I can’t speak for all women, but I do know we do tend to be more cautious about what we say in public.

Observe any public forum—from Sunday school to a political caucus. The majority speaking are male voices—but this, too, is changing. We women are changing as are men like you who have the perceptiveness to ask these important questions.

Again—thanks for the efforts put into a solid publication.

Michael: Many thanks for your latest communication, Sara. If you have further thoughts on wording in light of moving toward publication as letter to editor, feel free to let me know, but otherwise I think as written it’s well done. Oh but can I tempt you one step further—is it going too far to publish your reply to my reply as the final part of the interchange? I think the candor and insight of your latest thinking might also be valued by DSM readers.

Sara: It is fine with me to publish my original correspondence with you. It may promote more submissions—from both genders—which may or may not be what you’d like. Still, anything to provoke discussion.