My essay “Stylish Negotiations” was shared on BREVITY’s Nonfiction Blog today! This piece analyzes the stories in an unlikely place — a journal’s submission guidelines — and suggests that many journals aggressively mold and filter the stories of disability they claim to promote. It offers a solution to such frustrating re-shaping: honest dialogue between writers and editors about the subjects that matter to us.
By Emily K. Michael
Submission guidelines rarely make me angry. Because I seek publications that share my interests – ecology, feminism, disability, music – all the specifications can start to look the same. Most journals want a well-rounded submission, free from religious agendas, offensive stereotypes, and one-dimensional fables of inspiration.
When I find a publication that seems promising, I scroll through the journal’s “About” page and submission guidelines. Here’s where I can make some serious assessments. Journals lose my interest if they proclaim, “send us your best work” or “we only publish good poetry.” I won’t let my students use “good” and “bad” as standalone terms, so I hesitate to send my work to a journal that won’t express its own agenda in more vibrant language.
Among publications that promote the work of disabled writers, the guidelines evince a similar aesthetic. Here are excerpts from three journals committed to sharing the…
View original post 1,537 more words