JUMP CUT Contributor's Guidelines

JUMP CUT: A REVIEW OF CONTEMPORARY MEDIA is published irregularly, about once a year, using an 8 1/2 x 11 inch magazine format. It is run on a nonprofit basis by its staff and is not affiliated with or supported by any institution. Begun in l974 as a film publication, JUMP CUT now publishes material on film, television, video and related media and cultural analysis. JUMP CUT circulates 4000 copies per issue in North America and internationally to a wide range of readers including students, academics, media professionals, political activists, radicals interested in culture, film and video makers, and others interested in the radical analysis of mass culture and oppositional media.

General Editorial Policies

Taking an explicit political stand as a nonsectarian left, feminist, and anti-imperialist publication, JUMP CUT is committed to presenting and developing media criticism which recognizes: (1) media in a social and political context; (2) the political and social needs and perspectives of people struggling for liberation--workers, women, Blacks and other oppressed minorities, Third World people, gays and lesbians; (3) the interrelationship of class, race, and gender oppression; (4) new theoretical and analytic perspectives.

We stress contemporary media but we are open to publishing material on older films, tapes, and programs when the article involves a significant re-evaluation or uses a well-known example to develop a critical or theoretical point. Our range is all types and forms of media from Hollywood's commercial dramatic narrative to independent documentary and experimental work. We are especially interested in neglected areas such as educational media, children's programs, animation, intermedia and mixed media, new technologies, consumer formats, etc., and related areas of radical cultural analysis such as photography and popular music.

Areas of Special Interest

Every issue of JUMP CUT has several standard features such as review essays, reports, editorials and so forth. In addition, every issue has one or more "special sections" which are thematically arranged and which run sequentially over several issues. Upcoming and ongoing special sections are listed in each issue.

1) Review essays. We place a premium on review essays covering works in current distribution, from the U.S. or abroad. Typically every issue covers several Hollywood features and broadcast TV programs. Such pieces go in the front of JUMP CUT and have the widest appeal to our readership. We see them as opportunities to develop a political and aesthetic analysis of the dominant cinema/TV in terms of current work which many people have seen. We encourage a variety of styles and approaches and will run more than one piece on the same work if the analyses warrant it. In other words, we don't assign exclusive reviews or preclude further articles because we've accepted one on a particular film, show, or tape.

Our primary concern with review essays is that they provide thoughtful and provocative analysis. Because JUMP CUT is not a frequent publication, the typical journalistic consumer guide review has little appeal for us. We are not interested in reviews which are essentially no more than strong opinions forcefully expressed. We expect an analysis which discusses both the ideological nature of the work at hand and its artistic expression. Because even a fairly popular work may not have been seen by our many international readers, writers should not assume that everyone has seen the film/tape and should include enough detail to substantiate the analysis.

We are particularly wary of reviews of popular films and television which show the "bad" ideological message of a work and offer no explanation of why the work is appealing and successful with the mass audience--particularly when it seems the critic is putting him/herself above and apart from the general audience. In all cases we expect the writer to make clear the underlying political and aesthetic assumptions of her/his argument.

2) Independent Film/Video: Narrative, Documentary, Experimental. We are interested in reviews of new work, but also discussions of financing, production, distribution and exhibition of independent work. Discussions of feminist, Black, Latino, Asian, and gay work are especially welcome. We sometimes publish interviews with makers, but usually only along with an analytic article discussing the work. Writers should be aware that many of our readers may not have seen the film or tape being discussed, and thus should introduce and provide a context for the analysis. For example, issue-oriented documentaries often need an explanation of the issues and the history of organizing around the concerns. Reviews of such works often benefit from the reviewer showing them to different groups and seeing the responses. Similarly, because many of our readers are unfamiliar with contemporary avant garde media, giving an aesthetic, historical, and/or institutional context for such work is often helpful.

3) Third World Film and Video. Reviews of specific works or groups of work, and reports on national cinemas and televisions is always of interest to us. We are interested in the use and development of new technologies and consumer formats, such as videocassette distribution. While our primary concern is with films and tapes in liberation struggles, particularly in the current hot spots of US imperialism--Central America, the Philippines, South Africa, the Middle East--we are also concerned with the entire range of national production from the commercial and entertainment media to the state sponsored and subsidized and independent sectors. The development of media after socialist revolutions, from the Bolsheviks to the present, is also an ongoing concern, as is media production in the former socialist states.

4) New Media Theory. We have a long standing interest in developing a more rigorous and sophisticated left media theory. We are concerned with theoretical work which shows an awareness of socialist, feminist, gay, anti-racist, and anti-imperialist concerns as well as post-structuralist approaches. Because we find much recent theoretical writing academic and elitist in the worst sense, we encourage work that can bridge the gap between pioneering new insights and addressing our broad readership. Case studies that can demonstrate new methodologies in accessible language reach many of our readers. We are also especially interested in introducing major thinkers and trends in left cultural analysis with extended reviews of various works, survey articles, etc. New radical work being done in other disciplines and specialties such as art history and criticism, cultural anthropology, sociology, area studies, etc. interest us.

5) Resources. We regularly publish special bibliographies, filmographies, documents, data, etc. pertaining to our editorial goals.

6) Reportage. We cover significant radical culture, art, and media conferences, organizing efforts, retrospectives, etc. We do not run reports on routine festivals; don't bother to ask us for a letter to get a press pass.

7) Critical Dialogue. A regular feature, this is a forum for substantive discussion of topics raised in previous issues.

8) Media Salad. We try to give short descriptive and evaluative notices for films, tapes, books, magazines, festival and exhibition catalogues, and other materials which are especially pertinent to our declared range of interests. Usually these are written by members of the editorial board. We welcome having new items brought to our attention.

9) Books. We do not make an effort to cover all the significant media books since other publications cover the territory. We are especially interested in reviews of individual books or groups of books which can be occasions for critically discussing a particular topic: for example, a review of several books on film melodrama and soap opera could discuss the development of genre analysis and feminist theory. Query the editors if you are interested in doing a book review.

10) Media use and pedagogy. Reports and reflections on media in and out of the classroom; media in consciousness raising and organizing.

11) Visual material. Photo essays, computer graphics, cartoons, etc. are always welcome. Submit xeroxes, not originals. We cannot pay visual artists (or writers), but we will try to meet unusual expenses if the work is accepted.

Audience and politics

JUMP CUT''s readership is very diverse, and we want what we publish to be accessible to the largest number of our readers. You should assume that the reader has an interest in your subject, a basic vocabulary of media terms (for example, knows what a jump cut is), but no specialized knowledge. This is not to say you can't be theoretical and intricate, but it is to say you shouldn't be esoteric or pedantic. If it's worth saying , it can be made reasonably understandable.

JUMP CUT is a nonsectarian left and feminist publication, open to a variety of left interpretations and to criticism which may not be explicitly left but which contributes to the development of a vigorous political media criticism. In terms of explicit political points, we want writers to clearly and fairly present both the views expressed in the work reviewed and their own position. As much as possible, political concepts should be defined or made clear in the context so they do not read like jargon or sloganeering.

Editorial process

Submissions can be to any of the editorial offices. We request three copies; writers should retain a copy. Enclose a self addressed, stamped envelope. You should receive an acknowledgment within ten days of receipt. If you don't, feel free to ask. We will not accept manuscripts that are being considered elsewhere; if we are considering a piece, it should not be submitted to another publication.

Submissions are read by the editors and circulated to some members of the editorial board. The co-editors have to approve of everything that goes in; the other people's comments are advisory. On a few occasions we may get an outside reader. If we reject, it is usually with comments, so you should get some feedback. Almost everything accepted goes back for revision. This process can take 3-6 months and sometimes longer. If you wonder what's happening, write or call. JUMP CUT is a labor of love and commitment and the editors have other jobs and responsibilities. We sometimes get behind.

Our guiding principle regarding revisions is to be faithful to the writer's aims while being responsible to our readers. Most of our comments will be along the lines of clarity and readability. After a manuscript is returned to us, it will be given a final style edit which will be sent to the author before publication. JUMP CUT is prepared on Macintosh computers; if you can supply a revised essay on micro floppy disk in Microsoft Word format or as ASCII format it saves us time and effort. Do not, however, initially submit disks.

The editors decide on the contents of each issue with an eye to topicality and diversity within an issue. Current reviews and shorter articles are more likely to go in soon after acceptance. We can pay only in extra copies. Authors receive one copy by first class mail upon publication and 3-5 additional copies by third class mail. We will send ten additional copies to U.S. addresses you supply (must have zip code).

We are concerned with the attractive presentation of your writing. If you can supply production stills, frame enlargements, stills from a TV monitor, or other visual material, let us know when first submitting the piece. We need the distributor's name and address for independent work, and a one sentence bio for you.

A Guide to Instant Self-editing

Many JUMP CUT writers repeat the same writing problems. This guide points out some of the most common errors and suggests emergency corrections.

Excessive Passive Construction. You can quickly identify passive verb forms, a common problem in academic writing, by "to be" verbs before a form of the main verb. Often used to avoid "I," they slow down your writing, sound unnatural, and rob verbs of impact. Active verbs help readers, provide variety, and add punch. Underline every passive construction and try to limit yourself to one per paragraph on rewriting.

Failure to Use the First Person. Passive construction and the coy use of "one," "the author," etc. are evasive and lack personality. Use "I" to speak of yourself and "we" to refer to what you, as writer, and the reader can do together. (E.g., "I will argue..." or "From this we can see....") Obviously, co-authored articles are an exception.

Excessive qualification. Pay attention to the difference between precision and mealy-mouthed qualification. Be careful in using "might," "should," "often," "would seem," "perhaps," etc. Excessive qualification makes you look timid and your argument half-hearted.

Excess Prepositional Phrases. Strings of prepositions slow down your writing; you can reduce them by using possessives, adverbs, and adjectives to make the same point. Put brackets around each prepositional phrase and see how many you can eliminate.

Arch Terms, Translations, and Unclear Neologisms. "Nuance" as a verb is an anglicism that sounds pretentious to US ears and destroys your credibility, as do other words our readers don't commonly use in speaking. Check you vocabulary against mundane general usage; if it seems unusual, see if you're gaining anything by using it. For example, the figurative use of "foreground" as a verb seldom means more than the everyday verb "to emphasize." ("Privilege," "articulate," "inflect," as verbs are similarly questionable.) The literal translation of foreign critical terms without explanation (e.g., "overdetermination," "difference," "problematic" as a noun) confuses earnest readers who want to understand what you have to say but don't have a pass key to the concepts. Similarly, casual and careless use of critical terms which represent major (and often debated) concepts inhibits clear communication (e.g., "Brechtian" and "distanciation" must be used precisely). Use neologisms only if they clarify and enhance the meaning.

Complicated Clause Construction. The "German" sentence rarely contributes to meaning in English. Wordiness is bad--always.

Clichés. Stand back from your writing and look for tired and trite expressions such as: "intensely personal," "the bottom line," "there are a number of" (for "numerous").

While we are always ready to help non-native speakers of English get articles in shape, we have little time for interesting pieces with severe style problems from native speakers. It's up to the writer. Any standard college composition and grammar book will elaborate on the above. If you are serious about improving your style, we suggest Perrin, Writer's Guide and Index to English, Graves, The Reader Over Your Shoulder, and Cook, Line by Line: How to Edit Your Own Writing.

Style. In general, we use the current edition of the Modern Language Association Style Manual, but we accept other recognized styles such as U. of Chicago, and American Psychological Association which are based on putting page references in the text and bibliography at the end of the article. For example:

In his article on psychedelic semiotics, Kleinhans asserts, "Barthes is far out!"(133). But he has also argued, "Barthes didn't know very much about dope." (Kleinhans 1968c, 12).

Where appropriate give original publication date so it doesn't look like Karl Marx wrote something a few years ago. In general we've noticed that U.K. writers are wildly inconsistent and uneven in documentation--if you're English, try harder.

Stills from TV. The advent of VCRs allows repeated viewing, closer visual analysis, and the opportunity for frames from a film or tape to be used in an article. You can supply this. There are two ways to do it. One is to frame grab from video. Many university computer centers are now equipped to do this, and the people there can help. Essentially what you want to walk away with is a set of digitized images saved in a widely used file format (such as PICT or TIFF). You can print these out on a laser printer. We will need your computer files for final printing.

The other method is photographing from a TV monitor. Using a 35mm camera, with a moderate telephoto lens, if possible, and a tripod, use black and white film (Tri-X is fine). Take a light reading off the screen (adjust the monitor to black and white), shoot at 1/15 sec and set aperture accordingly. Bracketing exposures (shooting one f/stop over and under in addition to the light meter reading) usually helps get a good result, especially if you have to rely on machine prints.