from what I learned from the book It ain't necessarily so "numbers don't speak for themselves"
Why should accepted submitters' works 'devalued' because they've been accepted again? The people who do this only see one side: the fact that these successful submitters "did it again." They often ignored the fact that it's blind judging, also people who judged them can't judge their own work, the judging which determines what pieces go to the top of the list for the editors to decide and finalize.
I find it disappointing and sad to hear people argued that the same people always get publish. Eye contact have been 'charged' with nepotism. If this were true, why would the editors (who supposedly just want to get publish) go to all this trouble of holding blind judging sessions which takes a lot of time in organizing, and after that sending out acceptance and rejection letters, advertising for submission, collecting submissions, finding patrons (knocking on doors to personally ask) etc. etc. Nowadays people could just go to barnes and nobles, pay the fine and and get published by barnes and nobles.
People who submitted took a chance, a risk of being accepted or rejected. These people have fortitude and I commend their courage because it is horrifying to get rejected (nobody wants to be rejected). I'm speaking from experience...in my freshman year (I was one of the art editor for eye contact then)I submitted to eye contact...it was a literature piece...it was rejected...but i tried again in sophomore year with poems I'd worked on in my poetry class for One semester and art from my Design class...I was elated to find out that they were accepted- the reason why they were accepted is that they matched with the theme and it scored enough points to be considered.
People can't really complain when they don't submit, or they don't take the time to go to the judging session or take the time to 'craft' and 'refine' their work...most people procrastinate and they think that just because they spent 24 straight hours working on their writing or art just before the deadline (which is the following day), they'll automatically get in...the people just want their work in, they don't put into consideration that the editors have to be mindful of the magazines objectives, eye contact isn't just a magazine, it's an award-winning art and literature magazine...
and just to prove this, recently two of the editors who submitted art and literature received an award on a national level for their works and these are two people's work out of 17 total in the tragedy issue. It doesn't matter how many times people submit whether they're editors or not, it's quality that we strived for (quality over quantity anytime)!
Posted by Michael Diezmos at October 26, 2005 12:08 AMMike, great entry/argument... I'm curious as to why this topic sprang up. Was it from a class discussion, or did someone just start complaining to you?
As Editor-in-Chief, most people might blow off my comment on this entry, but it just makes me so frustrated when I hear people claiming "nepotism" and "favoritism" about EC. Not only is it 100% untrue, it's impossible. Our judging sessions are open to the public, but no one knows who submitted anything. The people who are on my staff do get in the magazine sometimes, but that's just because they are good at what they do and submit quality materal. There is a reason I have the most dedicated staff possible, because they love art and literature and are great at producing it. But even staff members go through the submission process. Even when we are discussing pieces at the editorial meeting, the staff still has no clue who wrote what!
People will always complain when they don't get in... but its out of our control. It's up to the judges who attend (and those judges haven't steered us wrong).
Posted by: MikeRubino at October 26, 2005 4:20 PMI just heard people in the hallway, while I was collecting patron donations...and I totally agree with you...
Posted by: Mike at October 27, 2005 12:37 PM