Misc. Review Guidelines

As befits our near-universal readership among the world's thinking people, Flak Magazine is dedicated to publishing critical accounts of nearly everything under the sun. At the core of this mission, our Misc. reviews allow a writer to review anything from a breakfast cereal, to a linguistic trend, to an existential condition.

Like any sound critical essay, a Miscellaneous review has at its foundation a clear and well-articulated thesis: bunnies might be cute, but they aren't to be trusted; eternal life is overrated; terrorists have no sense of branding. It provides the opportunity to make a philosophical, cultural or political statement, as long as it flows naturally from the subject at hand. You could, for example, review the Bible to make a statement about religion, or 2 percent milk to make a statement about bovine growth hormone — or review the Bible to make a statement about bovine growth hormone, for that matter, as long as you can make it work. One rule of thumb is to make sure there's a good balance between humor, good taste and practical usage. In other words: if something is mostly useless to the readers, and is in bad taste, it had better be funny. Or, if something is not particularly amusing, it should be intriguing, and potentially worth exploring from the perspective of a Flak Magazine reader.

Miscellanous reviews offer immense flexibility, but this must be used wisely, so that Flak Magazine doesn't get choked with substandard content. What we're most interested in are reviews that either bring an obscure topic into the light, or shed new light on a familiar topic; in either case, the most effective pieces are the ones that leave the reader thinking differently about something than they did before (if they'd thought about it at all) — a new angle, a thought-provoking insight, an absurd twist or just a deeper understanding. Explore our voluminous archives to get a feel for the parameters of the form, then explode them with a mind-bendingingly innovative topic that makes us reconsider what it means to be human.

And please be aware: the Misc. section is not a collection of personal essays. This isn't your chance to tell a funny story about the one time you went camping, or how this one grocery store near your house has great produce, but a lousy selection of canned goods. That's absolutely not the point. Personal anecdotes can be broken down and re-appropriated to form one sort of evidence upon which your Misc. essay is based. Some Misc. pieces are carefully considered abstractions drawn largely from a personal anecdote. But the anecdote is never the point.

If you're writing a Misc. piece, and you find yourself using the word "I," stop. Work very hard to delete "I" and write around it, unless you're satisified that only the word "I" will make the piece work. And remember that your editor will be reading your piece with an even more jaundiced eye, working to take out first-person references, swearing under his breath as he does so.

One thing we can't emphasize enough: For best results, please pitch your story before you write it. Tell us what the topic is and what you angle will be. That way, if it's contrary to the peculiarities of the form (or to our arbitrary editorial prejudices), we can warn you before you put in a lot of time and effort. Of course, if you get the hot hand and the thing just writes itself, go ahead and send it in — rules are meant to be broken.

If you've any questions, please drop me an email, and please put "Misc." at the beginning of the subject line. Peace.