Modeling the Future of the Sequoya Review Based on

70 Years of UTC Literary Publications

Mackenzie Scott
Jared Steiman

28 November 2017

University of Tennessee at Chattanooga

 2

Modeling the Future of the Sequoya Review Based on

70 Years of UTC Literary Publications

Abstract
As we find our society further and further ingrained (or entombed?) in the internet, there
has been much discussion about the future of literary and art magazines. Some speculate that they
will persist, some imagine their rebirth in digital format, and some even predict that they are to
die out entirely. The purpose of our research will be to formulate our own predictions based on
the literary publication history at the University of Tennessee at Chattanooga. This study includes
data collected from 86 of UTC’s literary publications, dating back to the 1940’s. It will identify
trends by analyzing the number of Poetry, Fiction, Nonfiction, and Art pieces published in each
edition, and attempt to speculate as to the future of literary publications. Additionally, it will
analyze the last 20 years of UTC’s Sequoya Review, and attempt to predict the genre distribution
for the 2017 issue.
 3

Sequoya Review: Background

Sequoya Review is UTC’s Undergraduate Literary & Arts Magazine. This magazine was founded

under the name of Southern Accent in 1947 and later became what is now known as the Sequoya

Review. From 1949 to 1957, the magazine coined the name Accent, and in the years between

1959 to 1969, the magazine’s name changed several times: Rook, University Echo, Echo Literary

Magazine, and University of Chattanooga Literary Magazine. In 1970, UTC’s magazine was

renamed The Literary Magazine, and until 1972 the magazine was published quarterly. That

year, it was renamed again as Twice Twenty-Two, and the literary magazine maintained this

name until 1975 when it received its current name Sequoya Review. This name was chosen in

honor of Sequoyah, the Tennessee-born Cherokee who developed the Cherokee alphabet and

writing system, and whose “efforts led to the 1828 publication of the Cherokee Phoenix, a

newspaper that featured articles written in both English and Cherokee.”

Today, Sequoya Review is published annually in the spring. Students submit their creative work

which may include fiction, nonfiction, poetry, academic essays, art, and music; the deadline for

submissions is late October, and to qualify for submission, applicants must be a registered

student as of August of the year of submission. The Sequoya Review is run by a UTC faculty

advisor and undergraduate students who enroll in the fall semester course “Literary Editing &

Publishing.” This year the academic advisor was Sarah Einstein, the Managing Editor was Logan

Clem, and the Assistant Editor was Kirsten Raper Kuizema. Undergraduate students Alicia

Lammers, Kelsey Fox, and Grace Stafford served as the editors for the fiction, nonfiction, and

poetry sections. To reach more undergraduate students and spread the word about Sequoya

Review, UTC student Hannah Rials served as the Marketing & PR Head, Emily Gray served as

the UTC Outreach Head, and Jacquelyn Scott and Kylie Kuizema served as Social Media Heads.
 4

As stated on the Sequoya Review website, “the Sequoya Review aims to publish immediate,

engaging creative writing and visual art by Chattanooga students.” The staff views each

submission anonymously, eliminating bias or impartiality for acceptance or rejection.

Literature Review

The Future of Literary Journals

In order to gain more insight into the future of Sequoya Review, we have taken a closer look at

literary journals as a whole to determine how literary journals are changing and how UTC’s

literary magazine might reflect and adapt to these changes in the future.

UTC’s Sequoya Review has been published consistently since 1947 when it was known as

Southern Accent. However, the longevity of the journal does not immediately ensure the future

success of the Sequoya Review; as literary journals become more common and the number of

submissions increase, there is a higher demand for financial sponsorship, subscribers, and

editorial staff, most of whom volunteer without pay and are unable to support their livelihoods

on this work alone. In his article “The Death of Fiction?”, Ted Genoways states that “after more

than a century of founding and subsidizing literary magazines as a vital part of their educational

missions, colleges have begun off-loading their publications, citing overburdened budgets and

dwindling readership.” This financial burden paired with a decrease in readers factors largely in

the decline of literary journals: according to Genoways, “Louisiana State University cut more

than 20 percent of Southern Review‘s budget. Middlebury College has given New England

Review two years to break even or face elimination.” Today, even if a journal can receive the

financial and volunteer support, it needs to have a unique identity and approach for selecting

content, so the journal will stand out among other literary journals.
 5

A suggested solution to the issue of financial instability has presented itself, in some

instances, in the transition from print to online publication. In the article “The Persistence of

Litmags” in The New Yorker, Stephen Burt states that “no print-only litmag could give a

poem...viral power” and that online presences are “where the readers are.” While many literary

journals are making the move to online platforms, some are still reluctant to do so. Adrian

Versteegh cites Brigid Hughes, editor of A Public Space, in the article “Digital Digest: Literary

Magazines Learning to Surf”: “For me, if there’s a piece of writing that I care about, I want to

have the physical object...There’s a permanence to it, a different kind of permanence than if you

find it on a Web site.” However, sentimentality alone is not enough to keep literary journals in

print. This is evident in the decline of fiction pieces in journals over the past few decades;

according to Genoways, of the national magazines, “only Harper’s and The New Yorker have

remained committed to the short story.” The reason for this decline, paired with the commodity

of journals, the financial costs, the lack of volunteers, and other factors, is a public that is

disinterested with the content of the publications.

Versteegh anticipates a large shift to an online platform and the need for this shift as “we

continue to move more and more of our socializing, our purchasing, and, for better or worse, our

reading onto the screen.” This reality, however, is not necessarily the final transition for literary

journals in the future: Wired editor Chris Anderson suggests “that the digital shift could prompt a

renaissance in artisanal publishing” and encourage literary journals, and readers, to value quality

over quantity.

While “Death of Fiction?” suggests an end of fiction in literary journals, Genoways

believes “nonfiction has experienced a renaissance.” In our research, we found this trend to be

true when analyzing the rise in nonfiction publications within the last ten years. The future of
 6

literary magazines as a whole is anticipated to transition from print to an online format; online

publication appears to be an efficient method of outreach to new readers who are “buying into a

literary service--a relationship emblematized by the app.” Colorado Review editor Stephanie

G’Schwind shares this sentiment and is referred to in “Digital Digest: Literary Magazines

Learning to Surf” as making the statement, “I think more and more of [literary magazines] will

likely migrate from print to online.” In response to the question of whether or not Sequoya

Review will be published exclusively online in the future, Logan Clem, Managing Editor for the

Sequoya Review, believes “the format will remain print-only for the foreseeable future” and “the

future of the journal is secure, so long as there remain dedicated and invested students to staff the

journal and supportive, knowledgeable professors like Dr. Einstein to advise the process.”

Methodology

Before this study, no one had collected data on the genre distribution in UTC’s literary

publication history. Our first step was then, by necessity, collecting data. The University’s

academic database UTC Scholar contains copies of all literary publications published on campus

since 1947. We combed through 86 editions, recording in excel for each edition the year of

publication, the number of poems featured, number of fiction works, number of nonfiction

works, and number of art pieces. From this data we generated a bar graph for each genre, to

better visualize how the numbers have changed year to year. This allowed us to assess the overall

rise or decline of publication in each genre. However, the different magazines that were

published in UTC’s history had different intentions, making the entire history of UTC

publications a poor model for projecting the future of the Sequoya Review. As such, we made the

decision to form our projections based on the last twenty years of Sequoya Review’s.
 7

Separating out the data collected since 1996, we created scatterplots for each genre, and a

scatterplot for the total number of pieces published each year, and added trendlines to predict

future publication numbers. We also performed a regression analysis of each data set, to

determine the equation for the trendline, the coefficient of determination, and whether or not the

model is significant. Next, we took the significant models and calculated the predicted

publication numbers for the year 2017, 2020, and 2030. Having access to 2017’s publication

statistics, we were then able to compare our prediction to the true numbers.

Analysis of All Editions

This study divides each of 86 UTC literary publications into four genres: Poetry, Fiction,

Nonfiction, and Art. Figure 1 in the appendix shows the percentage that each genre makes up of

the total publication since 1947. Poetry is by far the largest, holding a full 50.46%, followed by

Art at 35.50%, Fiction at 11.88%, and finally Nonfiction at 2.14%. Nonfiction holds the lowest

percentage not only because of consistently low numbers published, but also due to a complete

lack of published pieces between 1987 and 2007 (see appendix, Figure 4). In the last ten years,

publishing Nonfiction has experienced a comeback, and seen its highest numbers since the

beginning of UTC’s literary scene. None of the other genres experienced such a lapse in

publishing, but rather seem to oscillate over time, increasing and decreasing as the years have

passed but never entirely dying out (see appendix, Figures 2, 3, and 5). Poetry and Art have

remained nearly consistently popular; however, after Fiction’s initial success the publications for

many years featured considerably fewer pieces, only to be revived again the last ten years.

Across all published editions, the number of pieces in each genre averages as follows:

Poetry: 17.19 pieces per edition

Fiction: 4.05 pieces per edition

 8

Nonfiction: 0.72 pieces per edition

Art: 12.09 pieces per edition

Again, one must keep in mind that the Nonfiction mean is so low due to years of no pieces being

published.

Interestingly, as the publications have evolved, so have type of Nonfiction and Art pieces

being published. In the beginning, most of the Nonfiction pieces were essays, but now they are

almost exclusively creative nonfiction and personal narratives. Art began as mostly illustrations,

often paired with Fiction stories, and cartoons; now publications feature a diverse collection

artwork, including things like photography, paintings, and digital art. Fiction, which was the

backbone of early publications, has become merely a complement to the large numbers of Poetry

and Art which are being published now.

The data collected, representing the last 70 years of literary publications at UTC, does not

indicate the impending failure of literary print publishing on this particular campus.

Analysis of Past Twenty Years, Predictions for 2017

Due to the irregular nature of the data collected from various publications since 1947, we

decided to focus on the last twenty years of Sequoya Review for the bulk of our analysis and our

projections for future editions. Figure 6 in the appendix shows the data collected since 1996,

notable for consistently high numbers of Poetry and Art in each year. 1998, 2006, and 2012 are

absent from the data because UTC did not release an edition of the Sequoya Review in those

years. The following sections will analyze the trends in each genre, and attempt to project

publication numbers for future editions.

 9

Poetry

The scatterplot generated for the last twenty years of Poetry (appendix, Figure 7) indicates a

negative trend in the number of pieces published. The equation of the trendline is

y = -0.323x + 633.48, and the Coefficient of Determination is 0.2097. Because the Significance

F is 0.0559 the model is not significant, and therefore we could not make any predictions about

the number of poetry publications in the future editions.

Fiction

The scatterplot generated for the last twenty years of Fiction (appendix, Figure 8) indicates a

positive trend in the number of pieces published. The equation of the trendline is

y = 0.2434x - 484.88, and the Coefficient of Determination is 0.3306. Because the Significance F

is 0.0125, the model is significant, and we are able to make predictions about future editions. Our

model projects the number of Fiction pieces published in 2017 to be 6.05 with a margin of error

of 5.32, making the interval 0.73 to 11.37. According to the Sequoya Review editorial staff, there

are going to be 3 Fiction pieces published in 2017. The actual number of 3 does fall within our

projected interval, so our prediction was correct.

Nonfiction

The scatterplot generated for the last twenty years of Nonfiction (appendix, Figure 9) indicates

a positive trend in the number of pieces published. The equation of the trendline is

y = 0.2807x - 561.55, and the Coefficient of Determination is 0.3306. Because the Significance F

is 0.0000789, the model is significant, and we are able to make predictions about future editions.

Our model projects that there will be 4.56 with a margin of error of 3.28 and an interval from

1.28 to 7.84. In the upcoming edition of Sequoya Review, there will be 6 Nonfiction published

pieces. The actual number of 6 falls within our projected interval, so our prediction was correct.
 10

Art

The scatterplot generated for the last twenty years of Art (appendix, Figure 10) indicates

a positive trend in the number of pieces published. The equation of the trendline is

y = 0.26x - 502.82, and the Coefficient of Determination is 0.1093. Because the Significance F is

0.1803, the model is not significant, and therefore we could not make any predictions about the

number of art publications in the future editions.

Total of All Genres

The scatterplot generated for the last twenty years of total number of pieces per

publication (appendix, Figure 11) indicates a positive trend in the number of pieces published.

The equation of the trendline is y = 0.4609x - 885.77, and the Coefficient of Determination is

0.1346. Because the Significance F is 0.1341, the model is not significant, and therefore we

could not make any predictions about the total number of pieces published in the future editions.

Conclusion and Recommendations

This study’s analysis of UTC’s literary publishing history does not indicate any of the drastic

fundamental dangers or threats suggested by Burt, Genoways, or Versteegh. It does, however,

correlate with the assertions that the literary publishing world is experiencing a decline in Fiction

publications and a simultaneous increase in Nonfiction publications. It finds that the last twenty

years of data does not create a significant model for predicting the future of Poetry, Art, or the

total number of pieces per edition. However, the models for Fiction and Nonfiction both proved

to be significant and accurate when predicting the numbers for the 2017 edition of the Sequoya

Review. It is recommended that any future iterations of this study attempt to predict the genre

distribution of coming editions based on a larger sample of past editions, perhaps utilizing 40

years of data. It is also recommended to the Sequoya Review staff to begin collecting data on the
 11

number of submissions as well as publications, in order to better assess the total health of the

journal. The results of this study are applicable only to publications on UTC’s campus, but the

study could be duplicated on a larger scale, with data pulled from multiple universities and

publishing companies.
 12

Works Cited

Burt, Stephen. “The Persistence of Litmags.” The New Yorker, 7 July 2015,

https://www.newyorker.com/books/page-turner/the-persistence-of-litmags, Accessed

13 October 2017.

Clem, Logan. Personal Interview. 16 November 2017.

Genoways, Ted. “The Death of Fiction?” Mother Jones, January 2010,

http:www.motherjones.com/media/2010/01/death-of-literary-fiction-magazines

-journals/#, Accessed 14 October 2017.

Sequoya Review UTC’s Undergraduate Literary & Arts Magazine, University of Tennessee

at Chattanooga, https://sequoyareview.com/about/sequoya-review-a-history/

The University of Tennessee Chattanooga UTC Scholar. Sequoya Review, The University

of Tennessee at Chattanooga, http://scholar.utc.edu/sequoya-review/

Versteegh, Adrian. “Digital Digest: Literary Magazines Learning to Surf.” Poets&Writers, 1

January 2011, https://www.pw.org/content/digital_digest_literary_magazines_

learning_to_surf, Accessed 14 October 2017.

 3 of Pieces Published # of Pieces Published

0
5
10
15
20
0
10
20
30
40

Figure 3
Figure 2
Figure 1

2016 2016
2013 2013
2011 2011
2007 2007
2004 2004
2001 2001
1998 1998
1996.5 1996.5
1994.5 1994.5

2%
1992 1992

Poetry
1990 1990
1989 1989
36%

1987 1987
12%

Fiction
1986.5 1986.5
1984 1984
Appendix

Year
Year
1982 1982
50%

1981.5 1981.5
Nonfiction

Poetry Publication

Fiction Publication
1979 1979
1977 1977
Art

1976 1976
1974.5 1974.5
1973.5 1973.5
1970.66 1970.66
Percentage of Genre Publication from 1947-2016

1969 1969
1961 1961
1959 1959
1954 1954
1950 1950
1949 1949
1947 1947
13
 # of Pieces Published

0
5
15
20
25
30

10
# of Pieces Published # of Pieces Published

0
2
4
6
8

0
10
30
40

20

Figure 6
Figure 5
Figure 4
2016
2016
2013 2013

2011 2011

2007 2007

2004 2004
2001 2001
1998 1998
1996.5 1996.5
1994.5 1994.5
1992 1992
1990

Poetry
1990
1989 1989
1987 1987

Fiction
1986.5 1986.5
1984 1984

Year
Year

Year
1982 1982
1981.5
Art Publication

1981.5

Nonfiction
1979 1979
Nonfiction Publication

1977 1977

Art
1976 1976
1974.5 1974.5
1973.5 1973.5
1970.66 1970.66

Megachart: Publication over the Last 20 Years

1969 1969
1961 1961
1959 1959
1954 1954
1950 1950
1949 1949
1947 1947
14
 15

Figure 7
Poetry
30

25
# of Pieces Published

20

15

10
y = -0.3232x + 663.48
5 R² = 0.2097

0
1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
Year

Figure 8
Fiction
12

10
# of Pieces Published

8
y = 0.2434x - 484.88
R² = 0.3306
6

0
1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
Year
 16

Figure 9

Nonfiction
8

5
# of Pieces Published

3
y = 0.2807x - 561.55
R² = 0.6329
2

0
1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
-1

-2
Year

Figure 10
Art
30

25
# of Pieces Published

20
y = 0.26x - 502.82
15 R² = 0.1093

10

0
1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
Year
 17

Figure 11
Total Pieces Published per Edition
60

50
# of Pieces Published

40
y = 0.4609x - 885.77
R² = 0.1346
30

20

10

0
1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
Year