Robert Hills: Can you tell our readers what originally inspired the creation of TR?  When we’re starting !, we often hear people say that the world doesn’t need any more literary magazines other than The Big Five. What made you feel that there was still a need for another independent literary voice in Canada and in the world? 

Adrianna: Last year we were gathered for a dinner party at Tia’s apartment. She’d been hosting gatherings like this for a while, kind of trying to bring together friends who have similar interests and art similarly in the local film or literature worlds. So naturally we ended up talking about writing since we’re all freelancers and were, at the time, lamenting how hard it is to place book reviews and other writing in Canada. There just aren’t that many publications that publish longer form reviews or essays that are voicey or the like. We also were thinking about the literary magazines we read from elsewhere in the world and thought, why doesn’t Toronto have something like that? A review that’s based here, that is inspired by the city in which we live, but that puts us in conversation with a national and global literary culture? We had just the right amount of free time, energy, and a tiny bit our own disposable incomes to make this happen. And so now, a year later, we’re proud to say that TR represents this vision.

Abby: Toronto Review has its roots in the fact that its founders are writers and critics who wanted to see a different caliber of literary magazine in Canada—one that celebrates local creatives and engages with a borderless discourse.

In fact, when we canvassed publishers, publicists, presses, and literary agents, no one told us that there were too many magazines! Everyone acknowledges a near-desperate need for a stronger literary interplay.

Robert: When you’re starting a literary magazine, what is the part that turned out to be much harder than expected, and what TR did to overcome it? For us, some of the biggest challenges have been building a genuine readership and gaining the financial ability to host a website and publish in print.

Abby: For me, the most challenging parts have been 1) ensuring that all of the T’s are crossed and I’s are dotted and 2) learning how to delegate and trust. For the first part, running a magazine involves so much more than just commissioning and editing: it involves fundraising, networking, brand creation, establishing a social media identity, making/vending/shipping merchandise—the list goes on! Ensuring that nothing slips between the cracks and optimizing outreach to support the growth of the publication is profoundly time- and energy- consuming. You have to really want it! For the second part, our group happens to be a bunch of high-achieving, exacting writers and readers. We all have high standards and we want to manifest a product that we can be proud of. This requires awareness of our own gifts and limits as well as the gifts and limits of others to streamline a workflow that draws the best out of us to bring the best forward.

Robert: As Canadian publications ourselves, what kind of literary voice feels especially “Canadian” to you right now? As an Alberta magazine, we often get submissions about horses and the prairie farmlife. How about in Toronto?

Abby: We’re certainly magnetized toward local stories, but have a telescopic mandate, such that we want for readers from any continent to read the pieces we publish and feel that they apply to them too in some way. I actually recently lived in Edmonton for several months and was so moved by the strong art community there. So many of the critical concerns we have here—about supporting a thriving literary culture and enabling serious criticism and reviews—are felt in the prairies as well. We’re proud of our Western Canadian readership and contributors, shoutout Emily Hoven and Joshua Whitehead! 

In terms of voice: there is no real “Canadian” voice, to us. Or at least, a national literature—one that communicates with but does not revolve around our southern compatriots—is changing and developing from one day to the next. There’s a version of Canadianness that has been trafficked as palatable, almost a caricature of a caricature. We’re interested in what’s beside, behind, and ahead of that. 

Adrianna: I think sometimes Canadian writing gets stuck as one idea of itself. Which is a problem, to me, insofar as it reifies an idea about Canadian national identity that I don’t think has ever been true and certainly has a political valence that I don’t agree with. So all to say, I don’t think there is one “Canadian” voice and I don’t think that we should strive for one. I think the contemporary international political landscape makes us feel like we have to reinvest in Canada as a coherent identity or entity, and that isn’t necessarily wrong, but I don’t think it is productive for Canadian literary culture. Instead, I think I’m more interested in actually turning outward rather than turning inward. I think it’s important to cultivate a sense of our national literary culture as being in the world rather than being closed off from it. And I think rather than trying to pin down what a “Canadian” voice is, it’s more important to invest in Canadian creatives themselves.

Robert: On the lighter side of things, what is the funniest, strangest, or most memorable message/submission your team has experienced? We’ve received one submission that goes like “You must accept these two poems because I’ve submitted them to the New Yorker…”

Abby: Some of the strangest emails I’ve received have been in response to rejections I’ve sent out. We get so many pitches, so we have to be selective, of course, and we can’t take everything and we certainly don’t accept anything whole-cloth. But some people respond quite angrily, as though that kind of combativeness will change my mind and make me think, “Oh, sure! Now I definitely want to work with you!”

Robert: Lastly, many of our readers want to ask what some logical steps/advice you might give to someone who’s aiming to build a literary magazine? One piece of advice we have: list your publication on listing sites like Chillsubs/SubmissionGrinder

Adrianna: First I think it takes a lot more time to plan than you think you’ll need. We took a whole year to plan and build TR’s infrastructure before we launched, and really we could have done with more. But inversely you have to jump in a little bit before you’re ready, otherwise you can stall forever. It’s been a big learning curve in a lot of ways and while inevitably everything won’t go perfectly, there’s room for creativity in the unexpected. More importantly, I think, is to genuinely be invested in creating a community. To put it glibly: just have a lot of friends. That’s really what has made this work so far. If you don’t have a lot of friends who are willing to help or invest in you, then I don’t know that it’s possible. Or at least indicates that you’re not yet in the right community or not yet speaking to the right people. We knew that we were doing something worthwhile in part because we had so many people from our collective circles immediately respond with help or resources or enthusiasm. And we knew we were serving a community hungry for a project like this because of how many people have supported us.

Abby: Having a meaningful internal mandate and a clear vision for the project enables us to streamline avenues for reaching our readership and writership. We know that we are for a critical, idiosyncratic bunch, and so we align ourselves with persons, groups, and organizations who share our values. And, crafting an identifiable visual aesthetic as well as leading with a strong house style is important for attracting the readership and writership you desire—the standards, as we see them, extend to every facet of the work.

Discussion concludes.