Windward Review Volume 19 (2021): Empathy and Entropy

seeing the extradimensions or intradimensions to creative activity. You can touch and
feel prejudice as much as you can touch and feel what is material. That is why the
unreal dimensions of art are much more real than the things thought of as good or
bad.
There is a numbness that occurs when the editor does not realize this, there
is a reproduction of the same and more of the same, using more of the same practices
that promote the same. But when “good-bad” terms become non-axiomatic to
your editorial praxis, you don’t have to reinforce cultural expectations that you never
consented to. The editor’s role too is to inspect what they inadvertently consent to by
and through their process.
That is why my style of humanistic editing is never concerned with qualifying
“goodness”. i desire instead to literally make the creative architexture for a space of
creative freedom. Of course this path implies that “freedom” itself is an intrinsic good,
which is a stance that i have to qualify. So, i will note that i am not interested in my
own editorial freedom intrinsically. But my editorial freedom is necessary if i am to
build up a space for creators’ freedom.
/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
Transparency and empathy are everything. That is why i take ownership of
WR’s process-based failures while creating this volume-- it was never in my intention
to take three years to get this journal to print. Make no mistake, i have ruminated
frequently about the feelings and needs of contributors and this has caused me pain.
Because we work with every level of creator/ writer, including some that are publishing
for the first time, which is a daunting experience. And other contributors have
simply been inconvenienced by my lack of tact. Honestly, it hurts me personally to not
have the time to communicate authentically with each contributor, through email or
otherwise. Really, it just burns and i have spent too much time burying myself deeper
into bad feelings in some poetic demise, as i say, drawing pictures of myself along the
way.
As a lead editor, i have clearly made the choice of (in the background) setting
the right foundations/ values for our publication as opposed to setting up for efficiency.
i admit that my emphasis on foundations and intentional work is what has made
production so slow with this volume. But this slowness should not be misconstrued
as a lack of care for you. i believe that you specifically are weaved into our editorial
framework. And you specifically with your patience have assisted us in building up
towards an editing style that is empathetic, nurturing, and socially aware. In fact, the
most painful failures (in embodying this empathetic style) are what we have learned
the most from and used in our building blocks.
We have absolutely not reached our potential yet. i admit that perfection is
my goal--conceptually, with our structure and our ability to reflexively engage with
creators and readers. You might query why “perfection” is my goal. The reason is that
a creative journal is a necessary interlocution, an infinitely dimensioned story where
each contributor is entangled with the existences of other contributors, readers, and
even editors. Some creators do not see the potential in their own work until we provide
this story. Nothing less than the seeking of perfection is a worthy pursuit when
an editor becomes aware of this.
In case no one has told you so yet, every submission that we receive is a
unique lifeform that deserves its own journal or parade of support and adoration. This
much i know. Yet, it is impossible to provide this much to every single person. This is
a tragic thing that i know very well. Still, i have experienced first hand that not-forprofit
creative journals fill a special community need that nothing else does. Thank you
for being an irreplaceable part of our story and growth. With infinite love and infinite
thanks,
Zoe Elise Ramos Jmj