Ranking literary journals is a subjective bizz. To read my spiel about what I see as the unavoidable filter bias of journal awards + the inherent subjectivity of literary journal rankings, please see last year's entry about this topic. No need to repeat old opinions.
So, here are my new rankings of literary journals with the following caveats:
1. These rankings are totally subjective but at least I can admit it. I tend to focus my own submissions on journals I'm especially enamored with, meaning I tend to read stories in those journals more, which means I'm much more aware of how good they are. This is my roundabout way of saying there's probably lots of great shit I'm not reading but I have a life + I have my own stylistic, conceptual + editorial biases (as we all do) . . .
2. My only criteria are quality, voice, audacity + originality.
3. These aren't actually rankings. In fact, I'm going to list them randomly in order to deprivilege the journals that are listed earlier in the list
4. This list is intentionally incomplete. I'm not comfortable including journals I haven't read
2013 Haphazard Literary Journal Ranking
So, here are my new rankings of literary journals with the following caveats:
1. These rankings are totally subjective but at least I can admit it. I tend to focus my own submissions on journals I'm especially enamored with, meaning I tend to read stories in those journals more, which means I'm much more aware of how good they are. This is my roundabout way of saying there's probably lots of great shit I'm not reading but I have a life + I have my own stylistic, conceptual + editorial biases (as we all do) . . .
2. My only criteria are quality, voice, audacity + originality.
3. These aren't actually rankings. In fact, I'm going to list them randomly in order to deprivilege the journals that are listed earlier in the list
4. This list is intentionally incomplete. I'm not comfortable including journals I haven't read
2013 Haphazard Literary Journal Ranking
Slate (okay, just for poetry, but whatevs)