Blog
From Rejection to Publication: John Sibley Williams on Mastering the Art of Literary Submissions
by Writing Workshops Staff
3 days ago
When it comes to submitting to literary journals, the ratio of rejection letters to acceptances would make Vegas blush. John Sibley Williams has cracked a code most writers spend their entire careers trying to decipher. With publications in The Yale Review, Prairie Schooner, and dozens of other prestigious journals, Williams has transformed the submission process from an emotional minefield into what he calls "a mathematical equation"—one where persistence, not perfection, solves for success.
But here's the twist: Williams doesn't believe in the conventional wisdom that has paralyzed the last decade or so of emerging poets. Forget spending months researching the perfect journal match. Abandon the notion that bigger magazines necessarily publish better work. And please, for the love of Whitman, stop writing those overwrought cover letters that editors toss aside.
In his Mastering Literary Magazine Submissions Zoom Intensive, Williams dismantles the mythology surrounding literary publishing with the precision of someone who's collected enough rejection slips to wallpaper a small apartment, and enough acceptances to fill multiple award-winning collections. His approach: submit wildly, submit constantly, and most importantly, strip the emotion from the equation entirely.
"Creating poetry is an art," Williams tells us, "but submitting is more of a mathematical equation. And maybe it's just me, but I don't feel particularly emotional about math."
It's this radical reframing, from tortured artist to strategic professional, that has helped hundreds of writers transform their relationship with the submission process, turning what was once a source of anxiety into a systematic path toward publication.
We caught up with John Sibley Williams to talk about mastering the art of literary submissions:
Writing Workshops: You've published in lots of prestigious literary journals. What's the biggest misconception emerging writers have about what these top-tier magazines are looking for, and how can they increase their odds of acceptance?
John Sibley Williams: That's a great question, and I do feel there are many misconceptions about the submission process. First, it's easy to simply say 'bigger journals publish better poetry,' but is that really the case in a realm as subjective as poetry? I have had poems I wasn't overly happy with and didn't feel were overly impactful win big prizes or find publication in major journals, and I've received 30 or 40 rejections for poems I believed were my strongest. There are too many variables to make an objective statement on which poems should be submitted to larger journals, including student screeners or a certain poem being a good general fit for a journal but perhaps not that specific issue. Second, journals always suggest reading multiple issues before deciding to submit. But would you have any time to write if you spent hours, days, weeks reading every journal out there? Finally, some smaller journals consistently publish as good, if not better, work than the bigger journals, which sometimes have a habit of only publishing previously known writers. My workshop will take poets through my full perspective and layered strategy on how to get consistently published, often in larger journals, but for now, just know that quality poetry doesn't always equate to quality journal…and bigger journals don't necessarily equate to quality journals.
Writing Workshops: Many writers describe the submission process as an emotional rollercoaster of hope and rejection. You mention helping writers retain their 'enthusiasm and sanity' - what's your personal system for managing rejection while maintaining momentum, especially during dry spells?
John Sibley Williams: I could speak to this for hours, but there is a core perspective I find useful, even necessary, to retain one's sanity and enthusiasm during the ongoing, never-ending submission process: don't take it personally. Editors do not enjoy rejecting work, and rejections often don't equate to 'quality.' Editors are like readers; they have individual preferences in style, approach, language, voice, imagery, metaphor, narrative, and everything else. The same poem can both win an award AND be rejected 20 times. Why? Because editors have personal preferences. So, I ask all poets who are actively submitting their work (or plan on doing so) to try to take their 'poet's hat' off and place their 'reader hat' on. Aren't there plenty of poets whom most people admire but don't at all resonate with you? It's the same with the editors considering your work. So, given the utter subjectivity of poetry, why not embrace the wildness of it all instead of fearing it? Why not just keep submitting and submitting both patiently and persistently without the drive toward emotional rollercoasters? Personally, I consider the submission process to be wholly emotionally uninvolving. Creating poetry is an art but, I would argue, submitting is more a mathematical equation. And, maybe it's just me, but I don't feel particularly emotional about math : )
Writing Workshops: Cover letters seem to terrify writers - they either overshare or undersell themselves. What's the most common cover letter mistake you see, and what's your formula for a cover letter that editors want to read?
John Sibley Williams: Cover letters are so very, very simple, and I think most poets simply try too hard by overthinking things. They often write a full, robust, detailed paragraph that explains the submitted poems, which one should never do. Just reference the journal name, the poem titles, and thank them for their consideration. Many editors will actually reject simply because the poet tries to 'sell' themselves instead of letting the work do the talking. The other major issue with cover letters involves the bio. Emerging poets without many awards or publications tend to either undersell or oversell themselves by either referencing almost nothing or, conversely, referencing a lot of personal information that doesn't relate to poetry or creativity. We will go into more detail on this in the workshop, but generally speaking just remember it's okay to have a short bio without any publications. We all have to start somewhere. But never pour random personal details into a bio. It's okay to have a one or two sentence bio if that's all you have relevant to share. On the other side of that coin, consider including things like colleges attended, writing groups you might belong to, poets you may have worked with or studied under, organizations or volunteer work you've done, or other non-poetry creative outlets such as being a visual artist or musician. Those all still speak to your creativity and perhaps professionalism. But the main takeaway on cover letters is to not overthink them. These should be fun and easy, be they short or detailed, and they rarely have any impact on acceptance unless you're aiming for very large journals that unfortunately have a habit of consciously selecting only known poets.
Writing Workshops: With hundreds, if not thousands, of literary magazines out there, from experimental online journals to traditional print quarterlies, how do you help writers identify their 'submission personality' and find the journals where their work truly belongs?
John Sibley Williams: Now that is the $1,000 question, isn't it? Apart from journals with a very specific set of guidelines (such as traditional work or prose poetry or poets needing to be under or over a certain age or be part of a specific demographic) most journals publish a wide variety of poetry. In the majority of journals, you can find a prose poem, a narrative one, maybe some ekphrasis, a sonnet, maybe a few more visually experimental pieces…all in the same issue! So I can empathize with a poet's struggle to find what they consider the best fit. But instead of finding this wide variety a problem, you can choose to embrace it by targeting less and submitting more wildly and broadly. I have found zero correlation between journals I target vs. randomly submit to and acceptance vs. rejection. I have read journals that feel an improper fit with my work that accept multiple poems while also being constantly rejected by journals that, to me, publish work a lot like mine. I've won both poem and book awards from publishers that are spiritual/religious while I am not a believer. I've had poems that are strongly political be rejected by journals focusing on political work while they accept poems that only subtly imply politics. There's just no formula for submissions. That is why I don't spend much effort targeting journals. I submit constantly (about half my time writing, half submitting) and wildly and freely and find this both saves me time to write more and has an equal or better acceptance rate than spending weeks studying specific journals and tailoring my submission to what I believe are their preferences.
Writing Workshops: You've won multiple book awards after building your publication credits through magazines. Can you share how a strong history of journal publications specifically helped you when approaching book publishers, and what threshold of publications made the real difference?
John Sibley Williams: In terms of a threshold, that depends on the publisher itself. You often see book publisher guidelines reference "at least 50%" or "a minimum of 75%" of poems requiring previous journal publication. So, you naturally need to at least meet the given publishers' guidelines. But in general the more poems previously published before submitting to book publishers the better. I personally aim for all poems to be previously published. This may be a long, ongoing, almost painstaking process, but it's hugely beneficial in the long run. And it's true that having a robust acknowledgments page can make all the difference. I know this is something poets often don't want to hear, feeling their work should entirely speak for itself. And when a publisher or contest reads blindly (so all identifying information and acknowledgments are stripped from the submitted manuscript), this indeed is the case. But in all other instances, it's important to, again, take off your 'poet's hat' and put on your 'editor's hat.' To an editor, a strong acknowledgments page illustrates how seriously the poet is taking their craft, how knowledgeable they are of expectations, how professional they are, and, maybe most importantly, how many journal editors have vouched for their work. In the end, always remember that book publishers are spending many hundreds, sometimes thousands, of dollars of their own money publishing a book that, if poetry, will likely not sell too many copies. So, editors need to ensure the poets they are considering working with know what they are doing, have a strategy, have been consistently submitting, and in general are playing an active part of the literary community.
Ready to transform your submission strategy from emotional rollercoaster to systematic success?
John Sibley Williams' approach has helped countless writers move from rejection to regular publication in prestigious journals.
In his Mastering Literary Magazine Submissions Zoom Intensive, you'll learn the exact strategies that have earned him publications in top-tier magazines, multiple book awards, and most importantly, the ability to maintain enthusiasm and momentum through the inevitable ups and downs of the submission process.
Stop overthinking, start submitting smarter, and join Williams for this game-changing workshop that will revolutionize how you approach literary publishing.
