Gender Diversity in Publishing | Case Study: Waxwing — Windmill: The Hofstra Journal of Art & Literature

Introduction

VIDA is a “non-profit, intersectional feminist literary organization” that focuses on diversity in publishing. Their annual count compiles data from 40 literary journals and periodicals with the intent of “creating transparency surrounding gender imbalances and the lack of diversity in the literary landscape.” Like traditional ‘Big Five’ publishing, prominent literary magazines have a history of unevenly promoting the work of white, male authors over any other voices. With work like the VIDA count and general shifts in cultural demand for more diversity and representation, many publications have made statements about their commitment to improving—but do the results reflect the intention?

I chose three different literary magazines to perform my own VIDA count with, each across three years. The gender data used is based on which pronouns each author used to identify themselves in their bio. Overall diversity was more difficult to track—if the author noted their race, ethnicity, sexuality, etc in their bio or on their website, they were included in the percentage. However, no author is required to relay every aspect of their identity to the public, so the number represents an ‘at least’ tally rather than complete accuracy. The pie chart represents an annual average of the numbers. The following bar graph shows the percentages in each issue published that year. The radial percentage notes the wider diversity in each issue.

This web series is just a glimpse into a small portion of the larger literary landscape. Lacking the resources of the dedicated VIDA team, it would have been impossible for me to track long-term patterns all on my own in the time-frame of the project. However, even in this limited data collection, the findings are eye-opening. Representation is there. But there is still a lot of improvement that needs to be made in the world of the literary magazine and beyond.

Some Brief Reflections

While the other two installments in this web series examine publications similar to the ones VIDA themselves have tracked, I also opted to include a literary magazine that they wouldn’t include in their counts. VIDA specifies that they do not consider digital publications, on the basis that “online content can be changed at will leaving very little trace of the history of that change.” They claim that print publications can and will supplement a lack of diversity in their limited page space by offering additional material in a digital edition and relegating diverse voices to an ‘inferior’ position online. It is undeniably important to consider the role of physical page space and who it is afforded to, so this explanation does hold some credence. However, I do think that it is overall a flawed approach as the publishing industry continues to shift more prominently into the digital space. Visibility and representation is no longer strictly relegated to what is actually printed—and digital editions offer significantly more flexibility in how much can be published, so not as many voices have to battle for support. In considering Windmill‘s own production, we accepted that while we produce a physical edition, most readers would come across us in that online space. The other publications examined in this web series, on another hand, are only available in print. Waxwing is unique across this independent study in that it is a solely digital publication, the only one that I was able to look into pieces further than the author bio.

If it is inherently easier for online publications to reflect diversity because of their lack of print limitations with cost and page space, then Waxwing‘s percentages ultimately do reflect that, with greater statistics of diversity in comparison to the print publications examined. However, simply considering it to be a different standard because of its medium of publication must not discredit the purposeful intent that the magazine and its masthead put into the voices that they amplify. Per the ‘Mission’ page on their website, Waxwing is committed to “promoting the tremendous cultural diversity of contemporary American literature” with voices that are,“ at their cores, both multicultural and multinational, and so the editors’ mission is to include American writers from all cultural identities.” In combing through the author’s bios and going to their websites in search of more information, it is clear that the magazine is well settled into its mission of diverse representation. However, this should not lead to stagnancy—even a publication that is on the right path can still be held accountable for improvement.