The ShatterColors Standard Interview -- Editor Version: Robert Scott Leyse

(Interview consists of 15 pre-set questions. Editors maintain a literary Website.)

1) Why did you begin editing, and how long have you been doing so?

I began editing on account of having uncharacteristically attended a "writing event," in 1999. I met many editors that I considered to be poorly read, politically motivated, trendiness-obsessed, artsy-fartsy imbeciles. I thought, "What does a gathering of clowns spouting pretentious rubbish and thirsting to have their asses kissed have to do with writing?" I decided to become an editor specifically for the purpose of having nothing to do with literary movements, politics, regionalism, and focusing -- for a change -- on actual writing.

2) What are your primary criteria for acceptance of work?

Stylistic individuality, with a focus on emotion mirrored by the style. Must also exhibit a logical progression of the narrative line and carry the reader emotionally, as opposed to burdening with overmuch description of the scenery. Characters must emotionally engage one another, or vibrantly interact with themselves.

Other things I like (but are not necessary for acceptance) are 1) mystical/religious turns of thought, 2) love stories, at whatever stage of a relationship, 3) invective that's playful instead of bitter, and 4) laughs -- whether they're subtle chuckles or shout-out-loud belly-massages.

Things I detest (and will immediately stop me from reading) are 1) preachy political agenda pieces/anything that reeks of "activism," 2) pop-culture-reference saturated pieces, and 3) simpering sentimental slop.

3) How important are cover letters to you?

It makes no difference to me what an author does or does not put in a cover letter, or if an author bothers to enclose one. The only thing that matters is the submitted work.

4) Do you ever feel compelled to comment on work you've declined?

On rare occasions, I'll receive a very good story that doesn't fit our needs. This is generally because the author has chosen to extensively explain something pertaining to the setting or an activity that the characters are engaged in, such that it comes across as semi-fiction. There was a story centered around surf fishing - very well written, but too informative about surf fishing to suit me: I'm interested in interaction between people, not interaction between people and activities. So I told the author why we didn't want it even though it was very good. I've since found out he's had it accepted by a sporting magazine, as it well should be.

As a general rule, though, I don't have the time to comment on stories I've declined to accept; nor would I be qualified to do so, since I seldom -- only in rare instances such as those above -- read more than two or three paragraphs of them.

5) Is there something of a theme that runs through your Site?

To quote the "About" page: if The Shattercolors Literary Review has a mission aside from the obvious one of publishing good writing, then it's 1) to promote vividness of emotion in literary endeavors, and 2) to demonstrate that "literary" and "entertainment," far from being at crossroads with one another, are essential to one another.

6) What's your take on politics and literary endeavor?

Literature should exist by and for itself -- be a world of emotion, conflict, captivation, illumination, escape unto itself -- with no political dependency whatsoever. I don't give a dead horse's ass what authors' political convictions are, as long as the said convictions are accorded something far less than a supporting role in their work. Of course, using political machinations as a plot-vehicle to illuminate the timelessness of ambition, deception, playacting, networking, revenge, cronyism, delight in sowing chaos -- where the convictions voiced by the characters are merely incidental to the conflict -- is a different matter altogether, as in the novels of Stendhal, not to mention The Possessed by Dostoevsky.

7) Who are some of the authors you most admire?

Contemporaries would include Camille Paglia and Erica Jong; plus many of the authors I publish here and on Sliptongue.

But most of my reading, and re-reading, is devoted to those who've gone before: Cervantes, Boccaccio, Lermontov, Stendhal, Laclos, Martial, Plautus, Terence, Menander, Moliere, Kleist, Holderlin, Strindberg, de Sade, Byron, Mr. and Mrs. Shelly, Celine, Faulkner, Poe, Stevenson, de Navarre, Dio, Baudelaire, Rimbaud, Sappho, Ovid, The Arabian Nights... Ancient Greek and Roman/nineteenth century French/British Restoration authors in general... Comic playwrights from all periods and countries... The list could go on and on...

8) How familiar are you with the literary canon?

See # 7, above.

9) What are your feelings about formal vs. free verse?

Poetry is a formal discipline that fraudulent poseurs are seeking to discredit via the sham known as "free verse." Many semi-literate pop-culture-educated hacks, for unknown reasons, wish to think of themselves as "poets": they proceed to convince themselves of such by churning out formless, incomprehensible, self-referential gibberish and calling it "free verse." Free versers are inordinately fond of deluding themselves that they're overthrowing tradition: they seem to feel muddled nonsense is preferable to disciplined clarity.

10) Do you feel "flash" fiction (300 words or less) is a viable form, or nothing more than a writing exercise?

It's a writing exercise, useful in learning the virtues of succinctness of expression. As for it being a viable form... Basically, some corner-cutting smartass thought, "Hey, why waste these writing exercises? Why not doll them up in fancy terminology -- call them 'flash fiction,' 'flashers,' or 'impromptus' -- and persuade people they're real stories? That way, I'll be able to churn out three or four or five of them a night!" Needless to say, I neither read nor publish writing exercises.

11) When not editing, what do you do for amusement?

Write; or lie on my back and stare at the ceiling as music blares and my thoughts dissolve; or dance all night, until I'm too entranced to realize I'm exhausted enough to faint; or toss the frisbee in Central Park; or attend baseball games/peruse the latest MLB news; or go to yoga class... The list could go on and on...

12) What's one of the most annoying things you can think of?

The fact that the average supermarket in America is at least 90% stocked with nutritionally deficient, artificially processed, chemically-saturated garbage masquerading as human sustenance. The fact that there are vast tracts of this country (i.e., suburban wastelands) where the only available sources of sustenance are fast food places and convenience stores, where it's not even possible to purchase pesticide-saturated produce, much less anything that's certified organic. The fact that Shea and Yankee Stadiums 1) won't allow people to bring their own beer, and 2) sell watered down dog-piss, and tell people it's beer.

13) Briefly describe what you consider to be one of your standout childhood pranks.

Happened upon some dead cottonmouths (venomous snakes native to the SE U.S.) at a fish hatchery and made use of the carcasses to amaze and frighten people. For a lengthier description click HERE.

14) What are your upcoming projects/works in progress?

ShatterColors Press is in the works -- I'm presently doing the business end: applying for a Certificate of Authority, filling out Resale Certificates, purchasing ISBNs.

15) Care to conclude with a sweeping philosophical statement?

Fiction writing is the fine art of adopting personalities at will, and then casting them off -- of convincingly playing parts, masquerading: never stoop to the plebeian level of actually believing what you write.

_______________

The ShatterColors Standard Interview -- Editor Version
© 2006 by Robert Scott Leyse

Robert Scott Leyse Responses
© 2006 by Robert Scott Leyse