Biannual Transparency Report (1)

Magic, after a certain age, rivets one more for its practitioner’s cunning and showmanship, his or her capacity to keep cloaked the serried rows of individual components that work to deceive you, than it does for any notion of preternature. Even afforded such transparency, you may lack the dexterity of mind—let alone hand—to understand it cohesively. We at Noble / Gas Qtrly surmise that any attempt at deception would inexorably lead to future issues that flatter to deceive; we very much want you to pay attention to that man behind the curtain.

 

Without further ado, here is the N.G.Q. Biannual Transparency Report for Issues 202.1 and 202.2:

 

Issue 202.1 received 106 submissions comprised of 279 individual pieces. We accepted 29 of those pieces; declined 216; and 34 were withdrawn from consideration by writers and artists. Of the 279 pieces, 60 were fiction; 12 nonfiction; 179 poetry; 26 art & photography; and 2 miscellaneous items.

 

The acceptance rate is 10.4%.

 

Our Tip Jar received 7 submissions comprised of 19 individual pieces—these figures are not exclusive of the above figures—for a total of $29. The journal earns just a portion of that sum: Submittable exacts a flat 99-cent surcharge, plus a 5% transaction fee for each donation.

 

Compared to Issue 202.1, Issue 202.2 received 92 submissions—a 13.2% dip—comprised of 243 individual pieces—a 12.9% dip. We accepted 29 of those pieces; declined 195; and 19 were withdrawn from consideration by writers and artists. Of 243 pieces, 61 were fiction; 6 nonfiction; 147 poetry; and 29 art & photography. We received 0 miscellaneous items.

 

The acceptance rate is 11.9%.

 

Our Tip Jar received 8 submissions comprised of 24 individual pieces—again, these figures are not exclusive of the above figures—for a total of $30. As with Issue 202.1’s Tip Jar windfall, the journal earned just a portion of that sum.

 

In addition to our general Tip Jar, we established for Issue 202.2 an expedited service for those who donated to Ferguson, MO’s Municipal Public Library and provided proof of doing so. From this category, we received 3 submissions comprised of 11 individual pieces for a total of $125, all of which helped fund the library’s ongoing efforts in the Ferguson community. Because it would be disingenuous and likely inaccurate to declare that those who submitted this way did so for our promise of a one-week turnaround, we won’t; we can say in no uncertain terms, however, that we as a journal are proud to have been even a peripheral part of a greater public spate of support and consolation.