This interview is provided for archival purposes. The listing is not currently active.
Q: Describe what you publish in 25 characters or less.
A: Trapdoors to inner worlds
Q: What sets your publication apart from others that publish similar material?
A: Status Hat is cross-pollinated. We publish art, writing and music in each issue. My bias is that we also publish a true spectrum of work – work created by people at very different stages in their creative lives, sometimes people experimenting with a form that is new to them (artists writing, writers making art). We also aren't publishing in a blog-format. We are trying to create a dedicated space for the art, writing and music, and for one to spend time with the pieces we publish. Perhaps because of these factors combined, I think we do a good job of finding unique approaches to each theme. We can be quite surprising each month.
Q: What is the best advice you can give people who are considering submitting work to your publication?
A: Well, if they haven't already followed Duotrope's advice, I would echo it: read previous issues; check out what Status Hat is about, first. Also, read our submission guidelines, and our current call for work.
Q: Describe the ideal submission.
A: For me, it's usually work that I want to re-read, and that “glows in the dark”, or floats off the page. Something that surprises me in it's approach to the theme, or if they are traveling familiar territory, it's still unique in some aspect or execution. I guess I'm looking also for work that snaps an issue in place for us. As with anything, one likes those "aha" moments, where a particular piece is going to help gel the whole issue to be greater than it's parts. Really, we are excited by submissions of good work, work that shows both diligence and inspiration.
Q: What do submitters most often get wrong about your submissions process?
A: Some people seem to be randomly throwing darts our way. We'll have posted a current call for works for any of 3 themes, and people will submit work for each of those themes (and the poets will submit 3 poems for each theme). If they really have work that fits all of those themes, great! But sometimes it seems like they may be submitting work just to submit work. I would rather see evidence of more thought in that process. If someone is using our call for work as a writing prompt, again, great - but perhaps it's not a piece that's quite ready for publishing, it's just an exercise, or due-diligence as a writer. While I like the idea of generating creative sparks for writers/artists, by issuing a call for theme-specific pieces, I really want to read their genuine work, and work that makes sense for Status Hat.
Q: How much do you want to know about the person submitting to you?
A: Status Hat doesn't read submissions entirely blind. However, on issues I edit I personally try to ignore bio or credit info submitted, when reading the pieces.
Ideally, that bio or cover letter info will show us the writer is earnestly engaged in developing, practicing and pursuing their craft, so I don't mind they include it. It just isn't going to give their work more weight in consideration, particularly in an age when there are a lot of online publications, so long lists of credits don't always mean much to me, and sometimes gets in the way. Too much information is usually not a good thing.
Q: If you publish writing, how much of a piece do you read before making the decision to reject it?
A: I like reading work, but in fiction or creative non-fiction, there are usually enough signs early on the piece isn't right for us. Stilted language, a clunky beginning, a feel that the piece should have been edited further before they submitted it, or was just a writing prompt type of exercise, are instances we run into where know the piece isn't right for us rather quickly. We publish very short works though, 1000 words max, so for the most part I read them through, and will re-read them, even ones we don't accept. Other editors on our team probably have their own thoughts and cut-off points.
Q: What additional evaluations, if any, does a piece go through before it is accepted?
A: We look at how various pieces fit into the overall shape of that month's publication. Some times work is of notable merit, but doesn't add anything additional, or a new aspect, to the issue's theme, and so we weigh how the “spectrum” of works comes into play for that issue. We will publish more of one type of work (say, poetry) in an issue if it makes sense, but we are also seeking a balance of types of work, or types of approaches and styles, published each month.
Q: What is a day in the life of an editor like for you?
A: During an open call for work, we confirm receipt of submissions within a few days. When I am editing, I read weekly. I need to know during the open call if we are getting enough submissions of merit for any of our categories, and whether we need to put out additional calls, or seek/develop new work ourselves. So I don't wait for the deadline to pass to read, and I don't suggest that method to other members of our team. I am fairly methodical, so I move the obvious rejections to an out-pile quickly. I list and categorize the potential acceptances, and also review visual art submissions. I am continually putting out feelers to find or develop new work in response to a call or theme. I'm looking ahead, and working on my own projects, or other projects Status Hat has in development, so I am juggling many aspects of this work.
For the monthly issues of Status Hat, once we narrow down the selections, we are in communication with the authors and artists to obtain bios, links and photos, and gather other information we need to format and upload the works. If other editors are working on an issue, then I'm in communication with them regularly to see where submissions are at, whether we need to do the additional calls, or maybe do an interview with someone, or find another angle for an issue, to sculpt it out.
Last, because of the many hats I wear with this arts collaborative, I am also out there in various digital and/or 'real-life" creative communities, doing the networking and outreach necessary to both develop potential audiences, and discover new artists/writers/etc. Basically, I'm following threads to see where the creative energy leads me and Status Hat!
Q: How important do you feel it is for publishers to embrace modern technologies?
A: I have way too many thoughts – often conflicting – on this subject!
I firmly believe in using the tools of one's time. But the problem is that the tools of any age can dictate how they are used, if we aren't paying attention. So real innovation with modern technology isn't happening much, in my perspective. The ways people use current tools – social networking sites, blogs, etc. - becomes homogeneous rather quickly. I would like to see less duplication/replication in how we apply technology in the arts/media. I am also a big fan of open source technologies, which level the playing field and creates accessibility to these tools.
I personally would love to expand Status Hat's uses of media formats – we have yet to break into publishing e-book or other evolving media formats. I think we miss potential readers now by not having other means of delivery. For Status Hat, it was important for us to maintain some similarities to “print” and art publications of the past, such as we have a submission process, we have a publication schedule, we have a format that attempts to create a hybrid “magazine” or “'zine” feel, even though it is online. In that respect, I think it's a nod to old school. Print publication is something I would still like to do some day... if I could imagine, and execute, an innovative way to tackle the many problems print presents!