Stand Magazine

Good analogy, Stan. This trite doesn't mean anything, other than the people concerned are in desperate need of major surgery for the removal of meaningless pretentious phrasing. It's couched in terms intended to make an impression on people. Sadly, most of us find it extremely irritating. There ought to be a law against it. I suggest sending them a copy of Ernie Gowers' Plain Words, or failing that send their piece of crap to the Codebreakers at Bletchley Park - they might just be prepared to put in a bit of overtime to sort the mess out.

The contact e-mail address is the English department at the University of Leeds, so it looks like it was written by an academic. The message seems to be 'we want the magazine to be accessible - but in our own elitist terms.'

Ah, that would explain it, Stanley... an academic. Now I understand.

sue

Sounds like Stand's been taken over by the Murdochs in a bid to strengthen its arse-wipe atrs dept. Either that or it's a pile of perfumed plop for the Chipping Norton set, who are sure to like the sound of Stand's snoot.
A medical copywriter could have made poetry sound more interesting, and that's really chomping on the bit.
I wish bloody academics would leave the real world to those that live in it.
Stroll on Stand, whoever you are.

I just can't believe the dog's breakfast of garbled nonsense contains the phrase 'simple in expression and human'. It reminds me so much of set texts I had to read at uni, written by members of the departments. 'Let's massage my frustrated academic ego by writing something that sounds so incomprehensible that everyone will marvel at how clever I am.'

Sounds wank.

The only simple part of this crapacious rubbish is the human wot did write it.

'Ok, you common grunts, you can come to my dinner party, but please don't touch anything, or look any of my colleagues in the eye. Please note, the caviar is not for you - here's a prawn cocktail, please mix your own ketchup and mayo.'

'A step-by-step guide to all complex topics of discussion can be obtained from the downstairs W.C.'

Stand is one of the most long-running and prestigious mags out there. And bear in mind that was written in 1952, when it was founded.

It might sound wank to you, but I'd be very surprised if any of us are good enough to get an mss accepted accepted by them. Even a rejection letter would be something...

http://www.ukauthors.com

I'm not sure I'd even bother sending anything to them, Andrea. I certainly won't fret too much about not being 'good' enough for them.

Actually, if I may say, your comment is a little unfair. 'Good' is a relative term. 'The Waste Land' is good. So, too, is 'Winnie the Pooh' (and the audiences for both of them aren't necessarily mutually exclusive). I think there are some excellent writers on this site. It's been an erstwhile home for at least one bestseller. That most of the people on here don't write to the exacting (and, it would seem, recondite) standards set down by 'Stand' is probably not a bad thing. I'd certainly far rather read comprehensible, accessible prose and poetry. I think if I was a good enough writer to get published in 'Stand' and was offered the choice between it (and the clique who reads it) and another mass-market publication, I'd choose the latter every time. If writing is about anything at all, it's about communication... and unfortunately, the communication lines from ivory towers are rather restricted. If a group of onanists wants to analyze each other's hand techniques, though, then they can do so with my blessing.

Longevity and prestige don't compensate for bad English. 'The Old Man And The Sea' and 'Invisible Man' were written in 1952. They're perfectly readable and comprehensible. 'Waiting For Godot' came out that year, too, and even that is a paragon of clarity compared to this! I'm sure, between them, the bods at Leeds Uni ought to be able to find a way of rewriting that paragraph to make it crystal clear what they're trying (and ironically failing) to say.

Anyway... I've e-mailed them to point out the difficulty. Hopefully I'll be able to understand their reply - if I get one.

"I'd be very surprised if any of us are good enough to get an mss accepted by them"

All poetry magazines are the same. Actual poetic quality means nothing to them. They just want work that fits in with their own elitist irrelevant mindset of what poetry should be.

Well, sorry, yes I take your point. I should have put good in quotes, thusly...'good' :)

Curious to see if they reply, Stan.

Actually, Salman, Stan is not exclusively a poetry mag, but there ya go, poetic license, eh?

http://www.ukauthors.com

Well said, Stan (not the poetry mag).
In with the new and out with the old, I reckon, and if Stand want to be elitist that's their prerogative.
For my two penn'orth, if it wasn't for abctales, I'd have never mustered the courage to try and write poetry, and if all that was on offer was Stand magazine (if they are actually as incomprehensibly convoluted as the text described), I'd have never tried.
Plain English that's accessible to all is the future of poetry, as most songwriters will agree, not a select few who sneak looks down their noses at us mortals like high-achievers do the unemployed.
Questioning the ethics of those with a technically superior command of language and intellect is unnecessary (although a squeak of banter can't hurt) so I say let it be.
We can all write much more happily when our minds are only as free as the time in which we reject resentment.
Where lives are affected by elitists, there'll always be good reason to question and protest, but vexation arising from words for the sake of words conflicts with our freedom to write as we see fit.
All genres have entertained the bewilderingly incomprehensible, even the hippies with Naked Lunch. If I can't get it, I don't read it, but that doesn't mean someone else won't love it.

Well... here's the e-mail I sent to Stand:

Dear sir or madam,

Is it possible for you to paraphrase this paragraph, please, into a more comprehensible and grammatical form?

And here's the reply I received:

Thanks for your interest and your comments. If you feel that copies of the magazine that you have seen are worth reading by all means send us one or two examples of your work. We do not accept submissions by email so please submit with SAE.

Oh... okay, then...

This wondrously questionable reply suggests that they're either as cookoo as the blurb or they really don't give two hoots what you say. The icing would be for your short to be graciously accepted as an unpaid gesture of goodwill.
The old gurad does seem to be rather demented, but maybe that's their . I reckon they just don't give a shit about anyone but their own.
Young Frankenstein's just started on Film 4.

Like I say, all poetry magazines are the same. Hopefully if even more people ignore them, they will go away.