Catherine and I attended a local-area writer's conference recently. One of the sessions I attended promised to reveal tricks of the trade on how to submit for publication. Being a writer myself, I'm always on the lookout for a little-known inside track to get an editor's attention (although, in the end, good writing always does it). I was dismayed to discover that the session, co-led by an editor from a prominent literary journal, was a laundry list of things not to do—don't send off a submission without reading the journal's guidelines, don't simultaneously submit your piece without letting editors know, don't argue with editors after they've rejected your piece. What was more dismaying was that, for many of the attendees of this conference, this information seemed new.

Aside from the relief I felt that JMWW is not the only journal to encounter these problems, I also realized, more than ever, that the relationship between our authors and editors is one of respect. We, as editors, respect you enough as writers to read your submission thoroughly and supply honest feedback and encouragement if we don't use it. Writers, in turn, should respect our editors by making sure their submission fits the needs of our journal. Most authors do and are a joy to work with, but it is still perplexing to receive eight poems when our limit is three, a fifty-page single-spaced submission when we draw the line around 25 double-spaced pages, submissions of already-published work, work that was already submitted and rejected by us previously, work that's not finished, or work that clearly is not right for us. Our work on the journal is from our spare time, time away from kids, lovers, friends, other hobbies—the extra time spent contacting authors to rectify issues that are clearly delineated on our guidelines is wasted time and, as such, moving forward, we are not wasting any more time. If an author can't take a few minutes to read our guidelines and familarize himself or herself with the type of work we have already published, then we won't take the time to read and mull over the submitted piece. After all, this journal is a love, born from a love of good writing. When we feel taken advantage of, it becomes a labor.

I hate writing such a rotten editorial because it spoils a magnificent issue. The writing in this issue is very strong. It's also whimsical and eerie. It's work that I still think about, even as I've read it over and over in preparing for this issue. Like winter's chill, it probably won't leave my bones until spring. Thanks to all our contributors for sending us such captivating work, for letting us be the journal to showcase it. It makes the love, with the labor, worth it.

On a final note, we are growing again! Thanks to Gary Lehman for taking on the role of our Biography Editor. This month, Gary highlights the poet Vachel Lindsay. Many thanks also are due Susan Culver, editor of Lily Magazine, for this issue's High Five. She examines five authors who knew when and how to break the rules which, as all of us know, is a thin line. We also are reviewing books beginning with this issue—please let us know if there's something you'd like us to review. Finally, I'd like to welcome Jocelyn Heath to the editorial staff. Thanks again for reading.

Jen Michalski, Editor