Hey Tim and Shaun -- don't get me wrong. I'm not going crook at anyone for not citing Shit Creek Review in all its hairy glory -- each must paddle her own canoe on this matter. I'm merely amplifying the idea that the title DOES have peculiar complex dynamics. I notice recently that some chap has started up a Rats Ass Review, which seems to be pitching at a similar ball park, so to speak.

[E. Shaun Russell]

Originally Posted by Paul Stevens

Hey Tim and Shaun -- don't get me wrong. I'm not going crook at anyone for not citing Shit Creek Review in all its hairy glory -- each must paddle her own canoe on this matter. I'm merely amplifying the idea that the title DOES have peculiar complex dynamics. I notice recently that some chap has started up a Rats Ass Review, which seems to be pitching at a similar ball park, so to speak.

I know Paul, but a few of the posts in this thread have caused me to re-examine why I've excluded mention of Shit Creek Review in cover letters. The reason is because I haven't wanted to offend the sensibilities of a literati editor, and when you think about it, that's no reason at all.

Like Tim says, you publish some great work, and I'm very honored to have been included within its "pages" -- what better reason is there for citing a credit than that?