What do you expect from a poet whose work you already know?

The Hat: We expect similar distinctions. We hope for greater energy.

Metre: Something new, not more of the same; or if the same, the same in a new way.

Notre Dame Review: His or her strongest writing. Not just the manuscript that wasn't accepted by The New Yorker.

Thumbscrew: Something different or something better.

William and Mary Review: I expect the style to be similar but everything else—idea, images, risks—to be fresh and new. Writing the same thing 30 times does not make a poet good. Best advice: keep 'em guessing.

What makes work from a new poet exciting?

The Hat: The work of new poets is different even from itself.

Metre: A rush of excitement that no one else has got there before us tends to be a good sign.

Notre Dame Review: The same thing that makes work from an established poet exciting.

Thumbscrew: Originality and craft.

William and Mary Review: First and foremost, a voice that leaps from the page. Perspective is important— a manner of seeing things that distorts my usual view.

2.)	ON AESTHETICS

Could you describe your aesthetic?

The Hat: The gift economy.

Metre: Stringent but non-prescriptive, pluralist but non-homogenized, open-minded but not to the point of our brains falling out.

Notre Dame Review: I'm an unreconstructed modernist. But that doesn't mean the journal isn't interested in work that doesn't happen to adhere to my own aesthetic. In fact, we are very eclectic in our tastes. We publish good writing; we don't push an agenda.

Thumbscrew: I'd rather not. I try to allow for my literary prejudices and predilections, without becoming too self-conscious about them.

William and Mary Review: This is difficult— I hesitate to create a recipe. We are an eclectic group. My personal aesthetic leans in the direction of imaginative surrealism, raw sound, bits and pieces of philosophy or religion without agenda. Words that slice are most successful.

Name three of your favorite poets, preferably not among your contemporaries.

The Hat: Joe Ceravolo, William Carlos Williams, Walt Whitman.

Metre: Wallace Stevens, Edward Thomas, Louis MacNeice.

Notre Dame Review: It probably isn't very useful in this context to say Homer, Dante and Shakespeare. So I'll say: Ezra Pound, David Jones, and Basil Bunting.

Thumbscrew: This century: T.S. Eliot, John Berryman, Sylvia Plath.

William and Mary Review: This is difficult, and reflects only my personal tastes: Sylvia Plath, T.S. Eliot, and William Carlos Williams.

3.)	ON THE JOURNAL

Do you read all submissions? Could you describe the selection process that the poems you read undergo?

The Hat: So far! Both editors have read every submission and sent notes to all contributors. However: odd-numbered issues contain only work that we solicit.

Metre: Everything is read, by one or other of Metre's two editors (we live in Dublin and Prague). Acceptance by a mixture of unilateral impulse and electronic consultation.

Notre Dame Review: I read all the poetry we receive. I usually make the call myself without a lot of deliberation. If I'm confused about something or can't make up my mind, I ask one or two of the other editors for an opinion.

Thumbscrew: Yes, I read all submissions. I take less than 1% of what I read.

William and Mary Review: The poetry editors read every submission, then select those which will go to staff meetings—the staff ultimately chooses the poems and the editors approve them.

Are cover letters crucial? Do you prefer original, creative, or factual ones? How long should they be?

The Hat: No, however referrals from previous contributors may be helpful.

Metre: Short factual letters are welcome, "creative" letters that read the poems for you [are] an unfailing editorial sleeping pill.

Notre Dame Review: A very brief factual letter is sometimes useful.

Thumbscrew: Heaven preserve editors from creative cover letters. They should be brief and factual, or should be avoided altogether.

William and Mary Review: It is nice to have a cover letter with a submission, but those that are overly creative and include bragging and/or photographs dilute the poems. We read and publish poems, not letters. Just the facts and polite well-wishing—that's a good cover letter.

When do you enclose hand-written notes instead of sending rejection slips?

The Hat: Always. This policy is subject to change, of course.

Metre: When "no" means "no, but. . ." and we genuinely want to see more.

Notre Dame Review: Almost never.

Thumbscrew: Always, unless a backlog has built up.

William and Mary Review: Rarely, but when an author shows potential and needs to concentrate on certain details to improve the poem, I will write him or her with suggestions.

Are you a writer? Is there a distinctive editorial approach among writers who are also editors?

The Hat: We are. In almost every case the magazines we see are edited by writers.

Metre: Yes. The only editorial rule arising from our both being poets is that we refuse to publish ourselves.

Notre Dame Review: I don't know any poetry editor in the country who isn't also a poet. The danger, of course, is that such an editor privileges poems that in some way sound like his or her own. I try not to do that.

Thumbscrew: Yes, I do write. I'm sure it doesn't matter whether editors write or not.

William and Mary Review: I am a poet, yes— most of us write. I don't think it makes a difference that I write, in terms of how I view submissions— I look for quality and don't ask, "could I write that?" Writing helps me understand what the poet is doing, so it makes me more familiar with the process than an editor who doesn't write— though I assume most editors write.

Do you have a specific type of reader in mind when you decide what to publish? If so, could you give us a profile?

The Hat: Ourselves, our friends, and others we would want to attract.

Metre: Beyond a few personal friends, the ideal reader is the one I know least about— the anonymous reader the magazine finds its way to and makes an impression on.

Notre Dame Review: The elusive "common reader" is of course the ideal. In fact we're probably read, like most other literary magazines, by our fellow writers. That's not as bad as it sounds. There are a lot of writers out there.

Thumbscrew: I hope my readers have in common nothing but a passionate enthusiasm for poetry.

William and Mary Review: No— we definitely do not aim to publish for a certain reader.

What literary journals do you like, other than your own?

The Hat: Aerial, Arshile, Bivouac, Boston Book Review, Chain, Combo, Denver Quarterly, Explosive, Faucheuse, Fence, The Germ, Ixnay, Kenning, Lingo, No Trees, Object, Outlet, Proliferation, The Poetry Project Newsletter, Raddle Moon, Rhizome, Shark, Skanky Possum, Snare, Talisman, Tool: a Magazine, Torque, Verse, Washington Review, and The World.

Metre: Thumbscrew stands out, though it's always a pleasure to encounter dynamic journals, whether Irish, British, American, or other.

Notre Dame Review: TriQuarterly, PN Review, Salmagundi, ACM, Conjunctions, and Grand Street.

Thumbscrew: Metre, Paris Review, Grand Street, and many more.

William and Mary Review: Poetry, Southern Poetry Review, and many others— we all have varied and eclectic tastes. I am fond of The Southern Review and poetry from The Virginia Quarterly Review, but that's my personal preference!