Online vs. print? David Lynn at The Kenyon Review throws his hat into the ring:
I set out the questions this way to make the point that this is not merely a hypothetical: something precious to me as a writer is on the line. Because, of course, there’s the larger issue as well: what does the relationship between the print Kenyon Review and the electronic KROnline mean for the writing community? Should authors be as willing — more than merely willing, should they be as happy and enthusiastic — for their work to appear in our online journal as in print?
The question was brought home to me in a recent conversation withG. C. Waldrep. G. C. teaches at Bucknell College and is one of the country’s most knowledgeable and gifted younger poets. He is also a valued editor of The Kenyon Review. Yet he was confessing his own mixed feelings about KRO. On the one hand, he likes the literature we have thus far posted on the site — indeed he has advocated for many of the pieces there — and approves of its design and presentation as well.
Nevertheless, G. C. made it very clear that some authors consider KRO nothing more than a “Kenyon Review–Lite.” Publication there, he argued, has less status, signifies less on a curriculum vita, than the print KR. Some writers, he told me, especially those who have passed through the opening thresholds of their careers, already have a book or two but have not yet been tenured or feel professionally secure, might not even submit their work to us any longer. They worry that if we chose a poem or story for Internet publication instead of print, they wouldn’t want to have to decline the offer and risk offending.