Patrick Mullins and Cara Foster from Canberra’s Burley Journal – what’s the future for projects like this?
We all know the literary superstars – Kate Grenville, Christos Tsiolkas, Gillian Mears and Nam Le, just to name some – but far fewer know about the literary journals that provided these writers with their initial appearances in print, getting their carefully crafted words to readers but also, critically, the attention of publishers.
Since the 1930s, Australia has been fortunate to have a plump literary underbelly of journals and magazines, some generously funded by governments and donors and professionally produced, others the result of one or two people who tirelessly spend their evenings and weekends at the kitchen-table sifting through submissions, sweating over layout and design, scouring proofs, and stuffing envelopes to get their hard work out into the loving hands of readers. Many of these journals have come and gone or evolved into entirely new beasts – here in Canberra we are fortunate to have the new Burley journal; more on this later – but the ubiquitous digital revolution is causing significant change, and our beloved journals are dropping like flies.
What are these ‘journals’ of which I speak?
There are the big guns, such as Southerly, in operation since 1939, which makes it Australia’s oldest literary publication. Meanjin began in Brisbane in 1940 but moved to Melbourne in 1945 and is now an imprint of Melbourne University Publishing; it’s highly regarded nationally and internationally for its excellent writing. Then there’s the grand dame, Quadrant, which entered the fray in 1956 and is proudly ‘biased towards cultural freedom, anti-totalitarianism and classical liberalism’; poet Les Murray is the longstanding literary editor.
But for every eminent literary journal there are many that struggled and struggled and ultimately gave up the ghost. HEAT, which aspired to be both magazine and book, was published from the Writing and Society Research Group at the University of Western Sydney. In its final edition in 2011, founder and editor Ivor Indyk wrote: ‘After fourteen years of continuous publication the sheer physical intractability of the magazine, and its limited circulation, weigh heavily upon its publisher, especially at a time when the electronic medium beckons, with its heavenly promise of weightlessness and omnipresence.’
Keep reading at The Canberra Times. Thanks to Stuart Barnes, Phillip Edmonds, Ivor Indyk, Patrick Mullins, Ralph Wessman, Jeff Sparrow, and Natasha Rudra.
Under the counter or a flutter in the dovecote 
17 comments
Comments feed for this article
March 16, 2013 at 9:16+00:00Mar
whisperinggums
Great article Nigel … read it in the Canberra Times last week and was waiting for it to pop up here. I’ve always loved the literary journal though really only end up dipping into them here and there – so much to read, so little time. (VerityLa is great, as it appears in a very easy to manage form and size! It’s free too … nice for readers, not so for creators/contributors!)
Online is clearly the way to go … I have bought issues of Kill Your Darlings and Meanjin that way. I don’t love them is this form – the kindle versions lose all the lovely design and tactility that these journals often embody and yet electronic versions are easy to have at hand whenever you have a few moments to fill. Open the journal, find a story or poem, and enjoy.
Funding small ejournals is the issue I guess (well, funding journals full stop is an issue, isn’t it) but perhaps the answer is in some sort of pay per view that isn’t off-putting for the purchaser but returns something to the creators. A numbers game, eh? I notice that the editor of Meanjin said that if every contributor subscribed they wouldn’t need to apply for grants. A responder (possibly an author) suggested that if every author could earn a living they’d be able to contribute! The editor understood the point!
We live in complex but interesting times.
Where would you see the Griffith Review sitting in all this? It’s another journal I love to dip into, though again not with any great regularity.
March 16, 2013 at 9:16+00:00Mar
Nigel Featherstone
Hi Sue, thanks for this thoughtful and detailed response.
I too enjoy literary journals, mostly because of the dip-in factor that you mention. Yes, it seems that the online environment is probably the literary journal’s natural home, though getting some kind of sustainable economy around the things is the challenge, and it’s a challenge that is currently almost impossible to crack.
With Verity La (www.verityla.com.au), we could set up a pay-wall, but I’m convinced that most subscribers wouldn’t cough up with the cash, even if it was kept low. We could also apply for grants, but to a certain extent we fall through the cracks – too broad for the ACT Government’s funding body, artsACT, and too regional for the Australia Council. But I’m definitely not closing the door on this option.
I’ve spoken to people who know a lot about philanthropic support and, in principle at least, this is probably the way to go, but despite pursuing some leads nothing’s come up as yet – the trick is finding someone who falls in love with what Verity La is all about. We only publish 50 pieces per year, and if we apply the average lit-journal rate of $100 per piece we’d only need $5,000 to pay our writers.
Another challenge for literary journals, either paper or on-line, is building an audience. Despite having social media as a tool, it’s a challenge to build a community around a literary project, particularly if we start talking about going beyond the literary community into general readership.
The Griffith review is excellent, and I do hope it keeps going.
Complex but interesting times indeed!
March 17, 2013 at 9:16+00:00Mar
whisperinggums
I wrote a reply to this but it got lost in cyberland somewhere. I suspect you are right about most people not coughing up the cash right now, but things may slowly change as people get more used to the idea (I live in hope). The first challenge I guess is coming up with an appropriate pricing model … I am starting to donate small amounts to “free” sites, such as Wikipedia, and a couple of others, and now I’m thinking of The Conversation. Not the $100 they default to – after all I’m retired! – but something. I’m dipping my toes in cautiously … but I would like to see writers get more recompense for their work!
March 16, 2013 at 9:16+00:00Mar
Gabrielle Bryden
Fantastic article Nigel – it is always good to read a summary of the status of literary journals in Australia – it was a tangled web when I first started looking at places to publish poetry – I only knew of Overland (the stand out of all literary journals of course 😉 ) and a couple of others – now I have a much better understanding of the heirarchy and politics of it all. Most contributors to journals do not expect to be paid – there are so many throughout the world and 99% don’t pay – if writers want to make a living from writing they will need to be having a long hard look at what they do and be realistic – it is certainly possible with freelance work and if you are a ‘popular’ writer or an entrepreneurial type, but for most writers the full-time other job will always be the way they make money.
March 17, 2013 at 9:16+00:00Mar
Nigel Featherstone
Hi Gabe, thanks for your practical and realistic thoughts.
You’re right that at a stack of literary journals don’t pay, though perhaps in Australia we’re lucky that the ‘main’ journals, particularly those that come out of universities and have Australia Council funding, do pay.
I’ve heard Kate Grenville say that the one piece of advice she gives to new writers is to ‘get a real job’ so the writer doesn’t have to write for money. I’ve always taken that to mean that writing is so badly paid that it’s best not even to dream of making a living from it, just focus on writing the best way possible. By the sounds of it, you’d agree with her?
However, I still believe that there’s a principle: writers should be paid for their work. But I also add this: it’s better to be paid properly or not at all. In terms of short stories, there are times when I’ve received such poor payment – $10 – that it’s more an insult than anything else. I’d rather just receive a couple of copies of the journal than be left to think that a year’s work (sometimes more) is only worth $10.
March 18, 2013 at 9:16+00:00Mar
Gabrielle Bryden
I definitely agree with the principle that writers should be paid for their work (and I would never do hours of free intern work – that’s just asking for trouble) but it is the nature of the beast in this free market world of our own making – and it’s getting worse for writers, particulaly journalists – some big hitting journos in the USA are being asked to write for free for things they used to get paid for, and if they knock back the work, there is another ‘writer’ willing to do it for free for the ‘exposure’ (another crock of shit) – if all writers refused to work for free for profit making entities (I am not talking about the small volunteer based literary journals and the like) than we might have a leg to stand on, but I can’t see that happening any time soon when you have ‘writers’ that are obsessed with notions of making it big in the book world (and not just financially) – the advent of internet writing has made ‘making money’ for writing even harder (unless you are a very lateral thinker who can sell things using the platforms available – and there are a heap of those type of writers too). Personally I don’t want to make money from my blog – ever – I would rather put a noose around my neck than have my work sponsored by product marketeers – but I wouldn’t have a problem with a best selling crime novel (that’s my ultimate goal!) – hahaha
March 17, 2013 at 9:16+00:00Mar
Nigel Featherstone
Hi Sue (Whispering Gums), thanks for your additional thoughts.
That’s really interesting that you’re starting to donate to online journals, resources. I hope you’re right that more people start doing this as a matter of course, that it becomes part of ‘normal’ culture. The thinking behind Verity La was just to start the thing and see what eventuates, particularly in terms of payment to writers. I, too, would like to see writers getting a financial reward for their work!
March 18, 2013 at 9:16+00:00Mar
Nigel Featherstone
Hi Gabe, what are you doing commenting on this blog when you should be writing your best-selling crime novel!?!?
As to on-line writing being the financial panacea that some people think it might be: I agree – it’s a challenge. And I, too, wouldn’t accept advertising here. Then again, if I could survive on it, or it was a decent amount of money, perhaps I would think about it seriously. There’s nothing like being paid for being a wordsmith. Nothing.
As to internships – why do you say they are evil incarnate (okay, I’m dramaticising for effect)? The reason I ask is that I’m currently interning, well, volunteering, and I’m loving the experience – very rewarding.
March 18, 2013 at 9:16+00:00Mar
Gabrielle Bryden
I am the queen of procrastination 😉 Internships are fine for not-for-profits; I was referring to big media enterprises (I’m assuming you are not interning for one of those) – they can work out for some, but many people are just being used for a long time – there has been a lot of debate recently about this issue – eg., the ABC internships, big magazines in the USA, etc., Volunteering for literary journals is a different kettle of fish as they make little money 😉 and probably wouldn’t operate without the help of their supporters – but even they can run into problems if they suddenly have some money to pay workers and then employ someone who has more skills (when money becomes available more writers are willing to be the interns or writers and there are more fish to fry, so to speak). Not sure if I am making any sense anymore – haha
March 18, 2013 at 9:16+00:00Mar
Nigel Featherstone
So it seems it all comes down to this: if the ‘enterprise’ has an economy around it of some sort, pay all those involved; it the ‘enterprise’ has no money around it, then no payment is fine. I like the clarity of this thinking, and it probably does reflect how things have always been – there are plenty of activities down through the ages where there’s been no economy, therefore no payment.
And, no, I’m not interning for a profit organisation – I’m interning with a community organisation so I can gain valuable skills and, hopefully, can make a contribution. Then again, I’m (currently) in a position where I can do such a thing.
Oh why can’t someone click their fingers and sort all this out for us – why does arts/creative practice have to be so problematic economically?
March 18, 2013 at 9:16+00:00Mar
whisperinggums
Interesting. My daughter who wants to write and, for a job, work in editing/publishing is currently interning (for no pay) with a Canadian magazine. It’s for three months and she’s happy to do it as a way of getting some skills that may make her marketable in a field that’s hard to get into. She’s aware of the issue of being taken advantage of, and is being warned by her housemate, but says she loves it so much that she’s prepared to be taken advantage of (she’s often doing more hours than the formal internship involves) until the end date. They’ve hinted at the possibility of freelance work – not a living wage but another step on the rung.
I too have been hearing some of the talk about the increase in unpaid internships. It’s a tricky issue. As one who spent her career in cultural institutions, I’ve used interns and volunteers. The interns were always defined times and we focused on work that would develop skills. Volunteers are a little different – we try to match work to what skills and interests they have. Some were very specific about what they could offer and wanted to do, others would be happy doing the most routine work.
The arts. Ya gotta love them!
March 18, 2013 at 9:16+00:00Mar
Gabrielle Bryden
I just read this article on internships in the USA http://www.dissentmagazine.org/article/opportunity-costs-the-true-price-of-internships I didn’t realise the extent of the problem – I don’t think the organisations should be allowed to get away with this level of exploitation – I am sure it will continue! A non paying internship should have clearly stated benefits to the intern – there might be some benefits with exposure and ‘networking’ but the risks are very high, and a person could easily get eaten up by the wolves (writers are sensitive folk – well, most of the ones I know – this could really knock them about).
March 18, 2013 at 9:16+00:00Mar
Nigel Featherstone
Hi Sue and Gabe,
It’s so interesting that this comment string has headed down the ‘how do we get an economy around literary journals’ track!
Clearly it’s a big issue. As is the one of internships (and thanks, Gabe, for the link), as it would seem that in some contexts internships are okay and in others they’re not. Essentially I agree that there must be clear guidelines around these things, otherwise the intern gets used (and potentially abused) and the employer gets everything, or, in fact, gets a complete headache. However, I do think there are instances where it can be valuable for both parties, and the long-term outcomes can be fantastic.
As to the issue of paying the writers, there’s an excellent piece and discussion over at Overland http://overland.org.au/blogs/loudspeaker/2013/03/pay-the-writers/
What worries me in all this is that as a modern society we only seem to value something when there’s money involved. For almost 20 years I’ve been a serious (and hilarious!) and committed writer, but on average 90% of my income has come from other sources. What do most people want to know about? What I do for that 90%. It’s because, I think, they can understand if I’m working for a government or in a consultancy, but they can’t get their heads around me just sitting in my writing room. I say this not so much to whinge but to advocate for a more nuanced way of valuing human activity and creative production.
Also, I agree that getting some kind of economy around literature journals is very important – critical even – but I also think there are other challenges: maximising digital technology, and – this is massive – building an audience. It’s all well and good to produce something for a small group of writers – Verity La is an example – but how to broaden this out into the general populace? Regardless of the massive promise, social media can only do so much.
Here endeth the lesson!
As always, it’s great chatting about this stuff.
Cheers,
– Nigel
March 18, 2013 at 9:16+00:00Mar
Gabrielle Bryden
exactly Nigel – it is our attitude to money and payment that is often the problem – we should value unpaid work like parenting, carer work for the disabled or elderly parents, art, writing, volunteering – society can never pay for all these things without going broke – I don’t know what the ‘solutions’ are – education on ethics maybe 😉 – but I can’t see things changing much (apparently if you get paid big biccies you are more valuable – just look at the sports people – hahaha – it is all nonsense of course – we are all as valuable as each other and unpaid work is often the most valuable to keep society running smoothly).
March 19, 2013 at 9:16+00:00Mar
whisperinggums
Thanks for the link to that Overland article … I missed it when it was posted (a hectic time for me). Have tweeted it … Same old, same old, I suspect, in a way, but that doesn’t make it not important!
March 19, 2013 at 9:16+00:00Mar
Nigel Featherstone
Hi Gabe, a very wise friend of mine, who’s also one of the best arts thinkers I know, believes that the problem is this: our economy doesn’t support arts practice, as in there is a structural flaw; putting it another way, our economy doesn’t have the arts at heart. How do we fix the economy? No idea, though I’m sure as hell that Tony Abbott’s not going to improve things for us.
Hi, Sue, yes, that Overland article is a ripper isn’t it – it’s send the birds flying, that’s for sure!
March 19, 2013 at 9:16+00:00Mar
Gabrielle Bryden
there is just not enough arty farty love out there 😉