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.