Thinking of making a literary magazine? We all have. It looks good on your CV and if you’re an undergraduate it looks good for grad school. Even if you’re not it is a good way to make friends among the publishing communities. At the very least it is something that shows up when someone Googles your name. So of course if you’re the one starting it, and it’s your idea, then you’re going to be the one with all the creative control whether you’re competent or not. If you’re not competent you’re already on the right track to destroying what might otherwise be a source of culture on the internets.
Have the wrong mindset: Do not treat your contributors as if they are things in themselves. Their work is only a means to making your publication awesome. They are mere work horses who need to be 110% dedicated to your dream of you being awesome.
Content Control: This is your baby. You’re the editor. After all, you’re the one who got the domain space. They don’t just give internets to anyone. You have to be a qualified to make a website about something. Edit everything that comes to your desktop. Shape it into your perfect vision for your magazine. There’s nothing wrong with practically rewriting a piece and putting someone else’s name on it, especially if you have no experience writing creatively and make it worse than the original and take away any of the original heart. Author’s proofs are for pussies that care about ethics. The writer should be proud to be published by you. After all, you have a website on the internets. It’s not every day that someone can put something on the internet. If you’re not paying them, and they’re only submitting so that they can have an online representation and validation of what they can do; they should gladly accept any and all adulterations.
Pick a gimmick: All of the best literary magazines have gimmicks. Let’s face it; everyone loves a party with a theme (Who can resist buying all that shit just to hang out with your friends you see every day anyway?). Make yours as esoteric as possible. Humor and satire of elementary school principals in your home town is an excellent example. You’ll have people submitting non-stop. An elementary school principal is not a source of mockery that will dry up soon. I mean why is he always wearing ties? And it’s like how come you go to him when you’re in trouble, but you go to the school counselor if you’re troubled? WTF is that about! And what’s the deal with vice-principals?! If the principal gets killed does the vice-principal take over? Are there seriously so many people after the principal’s life that this is a necessary precaution?
Ask artists to design images for the website: Find people who will work for free in their spare time. Be completely unclear about what you want when you talk to the designers. When they give you excellent vector mapped designs and artistic photographs, throw them away and post that thing you drew by yourself in MS Paint.
Have no connection between your mission statement and your actual goals: Go around recruiting people saying that your magazine will aspire for noble lofty ideas but in a fun manner. Make something petty, spiteful, and which if read by anyone would be sued to hell for libel. Don’t worry. It will take your writers a little while before they realize that when you said you wanted to change the community with argumentative literature that you really meant you wanted to reinforce the stereotypes that already plague the minds of the residents.
Ask the most qualified people to help you. Ignore everything they say: Get those with the most experience working with writers as well as editing. Ask them to be your co-editors. Pitch your ideas to them. When they both agree with each other and shoot down 90% of your ideas understand that it’s not because you’re stupid. It’s because they are 90% wrong.
Waste your co-editor’s time: Have them edit everything before it comes to your desk. Have them work directly with the writer’s to help them make their work suitable for publication. Rewrite every polished piece, destroy every joke, under cut any pathos, make literal the figurative, etc.
Stand by your mistakes: Did you just reject a piece because it wasn’t ironic enough only to have your co-editor write a very detailed description of why almost every word of it was ironic? That it was such a good parody that the accuracy almost masks the irony? Did your co-editor explain to you that you have no understanding of the genre that your magazine works in? That your English degree did not actually prepare you for handling or editing creative writing? Reply saying “Well, it just isn’t right for us.”
Justify nothing: Have your co-editors justify every little thing to you because you’re too stupid to know what they’re talking about. Have your contributors justify everything. Ignore it all. Do what you want. When everyone else questions your judgment then say “Well, it’s exactly what we’re looking for” or “It just doesn’t strike the right tone.” You know, vague bullshit that doesn’t actually mean anything but still supports your argument.
Ignore the warning signs: The last day, just like every other day you have failed to accept criticism from your staff gracefully. Tired of being used, mistreated, and ignored, one by one they will quit on you. Your steady supply of contributors is dwindling with each unethical publication which you’ve perversed beyond recognition. You are down to the people you normally rejected. But even their numbers are declining.
Finally stand there with nothing but your dick in your hand and a dead magazine.
Frustrated Quill 