Junker versus Lesser
Posted in poetic on Mar 28th, 2007
Junker, a noun. (1 pt.) Lesser, an adjective and an adverb. (2 pts.) These also happen to be the last names of the editors of two Bay Area-based literary publications, ZYZZYVA and The Threepenny Review, respectively, with their first names being Howard and Wendy, also respectively. Or “How” and “Wen” as I used to affectionately refer to them back in high school, when they were dating, and they, with me and my boyfriend (at the time), would skip 5th period AP Calculus and go to the mall for Mochalatta Chills at Cinnabon.Â
(The previous sentence is a lie. The false, made-up, fictitious, completely invented kind, except that I did go to the mall when I was in high school and Mochalatta Chills are, indeed, a Cinnabon product.)
So, all points given being random and completely subjective, this is how Battle Junker versus Lesser would break down if the world revolved around me, alone:
- Junker: handsomely-produced, perfect-bound, bookshelf-friendly journal. (2 pts.) Lesser: newspaper-style review, not very travel-friendly (gets crumply soon after purchase), but no guilt tossing it into the recycle bin. (0.75 pts.)  Â
- Junker: San Francisco-based. (1 pt.)Â Lesser: Berkeley-based. (1 pt.)Â I love both towns.
- Junker: prompt slush-pile response time of 21 days. (1 pt.)Â Lesser: even prompter slush-pile response time of 11 days. (1.5 pts.)
- Junker and Lesser: rejected the poems I submitted. (-3 pts. each)
- Junker rejection response: contains human handwriting. (1 pt.) Lesser rejection response: 100% form. (0 pts.)
Junker rejection response: informative (see logged-in date), encouraging (see “Onward!” and other content), but aesthetically-challenged (note lopsidedness of letter, standard white 20# paper stock, use of typical Times Roman-like typeface). (1.5 pts.):
Lesser rejection response: general form apology, no encouragement, but aesthetically-fine correspondence (note brown ink printed on complementary ecru cardstock, design element of vertical letterhead, typewriter-style typeface). (1 pt.)- Lesser’s blog: 5 posts since June 2006. (0 pts.) Junker’s blog: hella more than 5 posts since September 2006. (3 pts.)
- Has Lesser read my blog? Unlikely. (0.25 pts.) Has Junker read my blog? Hella. (5 pts.)
- Number of times Wen has invited me to hang out: 0. (0 pts.) Number of times How has invited me to hang out: …Ding! Ding! Ding! We have a winner. I am so-o not voting for Wen for class council.
i pledge to represent our Class to the best of my ability, to stand up to the Administration, and to try to cover whenever my classmates get busted.
meanwhile, please note that i think it’s unfair to be penalized for poor xeroxing skills (and not being able to get the rejection letter squared away; next batch i’ll try harder).
also, the font we use is Bembo, derived from an illustrious Renaissance face cut by none other than Aldus Manutius. And set in 12 pt.
also, i blog every weekday.
and our softball team kicks threepenny’s as.
best,
howard junker
editor, zyzzyva
Howard,
You misspelled “ass.”
Best wishes,
Kathi
[...] If you’re interested in Bay Area literary journal smackdowns, Debbie Yee compares Howard Junker with Wendy Lesser. [...]
Howard over Wendy:
1. Howard’s rejections are much nicer. He actually bothers to send them out. And then they are encouraging.
2. Customer service at TPR: The one time I telephoned, due to subscription troubles, rude without reason. So rude that I terminated my subscription.
3. Wendy is a fine writer. We at BK wish the above weren’t true, as saying unkind things about the Bay Area writing community isn’t much fun. We want everybody to be nice, or barring that, minimally polite.
Wendy’s blog doesn’t seem to have a feed, which is a minus for those of us who get most of our posts via a feed reader
Thanks, this was hilarious.
Love it. Thanks for linking to my blog. Check out my post on the topic: http://literaryrejectionsondisplay.blogspot.com/2007/06/should-junker-get-gak.html
Will you be the final judge concerning whether or not Howard gets a GAK?