Email Submissions--Good and Bad (But Mostly Good)

When we started, we didn't accept email submissions. I don't know why. Most other presses didn't, so we just adopted the practice.

Then someone sent an email and scolded us for being behind the times. The arguments for having email submissions made sense--less paper, easier to handle, etc.--so we made it happen.

It wasn't too long after that we realized what a hassle it was for us to accept paper submissions at all. With CP in a different state, transferring manuscripts cost us time and money. So we formally eliminated mail submissions, and overall it has been a good thing.

One side benefit that I didn't think about at the time is that it expands our pool of potential writers. For example, I wonder if Ivy would have sent us her manuscript if she had to mail a hard copy. We get manuscripts from people all over the world now, because emailing a manuscript from overseas cost the same as emailing it from the United States.

One downside to email is that it when you send an email from our server, you're never sure it's going to reach its destination. I guess that's true of a mailed letter also. Anyway, I'm sharing all this because I am still getting inquiries about manuscripts that we rejected months ago. The short answer to all these inquiries: If you submitted your manuscript before November 2006, then we won't be publishing it at this time. If you submitted it after November 2006, then expect to hear from us soon, one way or another.

--AB