Vision Statement for The Raintown Review by Editor-in-Chief Anna
Evans
Anna Evans, in addition to being a poet of note, is the Editor of the formal
poetry e-zine
The Barefoot Muse and the Editor-in-Chief of the formal poetry journal
The Raintown Review.
In the following article, she describes her vision for
The Raintown Review upon taking the helm as Editor-in-Chief in 2008:
I have a long history with The Raintown Review. Back in 2003, when I first began looking for
markets for my work, the journal came to my attention as one of a handful that
looked favorably upon formal/metrical poetry, and I duly mailed off a
submission. Editor Patrick Kanouse’s response was a few lines of ink on a form
rejection. Encouraged, I sent off another batch of poems, and waited anxiously
for some months. Eventually, in January 2004, a personally written note arrived
from Patrick, apologizing for holding them for so long when he had ultimately
decided to pass, and inviting me to send more. That third submission led to my
first appearance in Raintown, a sonnet
called “In Too Deep” in Summer 2005. My co-contributors included Jared Carter,
Thomas S. Kerrigan and Michael R. Burch.
Then Central Avenue Press, run by Poetry Angel John Oelfke,
acquired the journal. Oelfke decided to change from a stapled chapbook-style
format into a larger perfect bound volume. Meanwhile, Patrick Kanouse gave the
reins back to Harvey Stanbrough, the original Editor, who was also good enough
to publish a sonnet of mine: “The Intimacy of Hand to Hand Combat” in Spring
2006. When Harvey decided to retire, John Oelfke invited Joseph Salemi to guest
edit one issue, followed by Tom Kerrigan to take a yearlong stint as Editor,
producing two issues. Tom solicited poems from me in the fall of 2007 for his
first issue, along with a review piece on a couple of books by Joe Kennedy.
Given my page count in the issue, and my professional friendship with Tom, it
seemed only natural for me to take over the job of proof reading, a chore for
which my erstwhile career as a junior brand manager in fast-moving consumer
goods had prepared me well. Tom insisted on giving me the title of Associate
Editor, and as we moved forward with his second issue, I found myself willingly
taking on more of the workload. When Tom confirmed his intention to retire after
his year’s tenure, John Oelfke invited me to take over as Editor-in-Chief, and
in turn I deputized Quincy R. Lehr as Associate Editor.
So, from slush pile also-ran to Editor in five years: an
American success story which would be “rags to riches” if, of course, there were
any riches to be had in poetry—The
Raintown Review, like any other small-press journal, barely breaks even on
printing costs. Nevertheless, my intimate association with the journal in all
its incarnations gives me what I hope is a special insight into the values for
which the journal has always stood, and fires my enthusiasm to make it into one
of the print journals in which today’s formal/metrical poets want to be seen.
Those values begin with the lessons I absorbed from Patrick
Kanouse: that courtesy, promptness and fairness are the way to run a journal to
which poets want to submit. (I remember, going back again to my early fumbling
attempts at achieving publication, how I felt when a well-known online journal
responded to the emailed submission, over which I had agonized, with the terse
reply: “No.”) I guarantee all poets who follow the submission guidelines (email
poems to oelfkej@aol.com) that their
submissions will be read in a timely manner, that they will be treated with
respect, and that equal consideration will be given to submissions from unknown
poets as to those from published “names.” (Where would I be, had Patrick
and others thrown MY poems out simply because I had no publishing
history?)
The Raintown Review
will continue to have a strong bias toward formal/metrical poetry, in part
because there is no shortage of journals that turn up their noses at it, and in
part because as an editor and a poet I am a firm believer in craft. However, we
will never turn down an excellent poem simply because it does not adhere
sufficiently to metrical rules, for then we would be guilty of applying
stereotypes similar to the ones that are often applied to formal poems.
Note: this will continue to be a key difference in the way
I edit my online journal, the Barefoot
Muse, which ONLY accepts poems with a recognizable allegiance to
meter or form. As befits an online journal
Barefoot Muse also has a laxer attitude toward sex and swear words, and lies
politically well to the left of center.
I want to see Raintown become a more international journal, and we have several factors in
our favor regarding this. Firstly, we prefer email submissions, so postage and
the dreaded IRC are no barrier to poets from overseas. Secondly, both Quincy R.
Lehr and myself have strong links with Europe, and we plan to encourage European
poets to submit their work. Poets from the other continents are, it should go
without saying, also welcome.
Finally, I want to see Raintown gain a reputation as the most
egalitarian of journals: we are NOT a clique. We do not care whether or not you
have an MFA (For the record: I do, Quincy doesn’t.) We encourage minorities of
all kinds to submit, although their work will not get preferential treatment
because of any misguided political correctness. Our poetic elders will not get a
free pass for their venerable age, nor will younger poets be excused errors
because of their inexperience. Quite simply, we want to publish the
best-crafted, freshest poetry we can, and if it comes from unknown poets in the
slush-pile, so be it. Who knows? Maybe in five years time one of them will be
writing a piece exactly like this.