I hear you. The annoyance is real. I prefer the short and professional. "Thanks for submitting to us, but we'ere going to take a pass," though, of course, I most prefer, "We loved this piece and want to publish it in our next issue." :D
Years ago in the times of SASE, as Sheree Shatsky noted, I received a nice personal letter from a legendary SF/Fantasy mag. I kept it all these years. I was full of doubt about my writing and the editor's "you write very well" went straight to my heart, it wrapped a big warm blanket around the fact they didn't like the story :) - I don't mind the "not this time, try us again" without qualifiers, who needs the mollycoddling. I did an editorial stint recently and in some cases, I felt compelled to say why I didn't accept the story. It was always "technical": the ending feels rushed, or it doesn't match the theme of the issue. In one case, I really liked the story but felt it missed the point and I suggested a slight rewrite. The author came back with an update and we published the story. When I gave a short critique, I had doubts though. I'm just one reader, why would my opinion matter, how would the writer take it?
"Not this time, try us again" is nice, but very different from "Not for us at this time" without any invitation to try some other time. Does not at this time mean Daylight Savings Time, perhaps, or this geological time? :-)
I've tried keeping track, but end up returning to Submittable to see what might be a good lit mag to try again. I've had so many accceptances/pubs during and since the pandemic--and of course so many rejections.
If you'd like to keep a daily writer's journal (as I do), it's helpful to use the last 12 pages to record acceptances & publications + dates + your comments. Currently, I use Mead's At-A-Glance [SD-389]. As well as my stock of pens with colored inks for "codes at a glance." :-)
* * Good luck always on your numerous acceptances and dozens of book publications throughout your long successful career, Lev. * *
Thanks for the suggestion--I'm not that organized. :-) I kept a journal for writing etc. from the late 70s on but now use my journal just to write about my weekly voice lessons and the voice study work I do between them. That's about all the journal writing I have the time and energy for after decades of keeping a journal. And then most of my old journals are in Special Collections now at MSU's Library anyway. Oh, I do actually keep another skeletal journal recording my migraines, how long they lasted, what might have triggered them, etc.
Years ago, back in the days of Writer’s Market and snail mail subs, I received my SASE back from Paris Review with a handwritten note - “Have you read our journal?” Lol, I laugh (and cringe at my youthful naiveté), but yet, that handwritten note ... a badge of rejection honor! And the reader took the time to write it. Definitely frame-worthy, if I could find it!
I always picture PR hitting a quick reject on Submittable, so a handwritten note, someone took a couple of seconds to scratch out a backhanded rejection. Funny what writers remember!
My first acceptance after a five-year drought had me jumping up and down, literally, and the money was impressive. This was 1983, and $150 for a graduate student was big bucks.
In my lifetime, I have found many area of literature in the United States to be seriously marred by calcified hierachies more interested in power than offering gifts of talented writers.
In the schools from high school to college, we have tedious curriculums that have not changed their basic content in over fifty years. Quite often, the superintendents, principas, department chairs are fictionally illiterate and have not a clue about rising young writers anywhere between the ages of 25 and fifty. Yet these are the leaders of {education in. America).
With literary magazines, home for gfited wordsmiths everuwhere, they take SUBMISSIONS.. You submit to them. They read and you shutup. There is no dialogue. That's impossible. They have scoes, hundreds of "submissions".
You have put blood,sweat and tears into your work ( Well, most of us have. Some do one diarrhetic draft , think it's gold, send it off, and wait for God to bring the reporters. These are those I call the crazzy LAZIE=IES the amateurs who often ally with some others and form a literature group of "soubro sousiistice." Mutual therapy that hasnt seen a metaphor in thirty year tbc. But, how soon can we all changethe word submittable. to. OFFERING!
Oh, for the good old days of literary zines. Along with missing the efficient brisk business of, "We're going to pass," I also miss brief, professional bio-notes - - the ones scrubbed of overly familiar and even jaw-dropping intimate details.
What happened to a writer's mystique?
Lev, I agree - - stop praising us for being "courageous" for submitting a piece or reminding us "we're writers, too."
I remember years doing a reading in London and my English friends wincing when someone in the audience asked me a very personal question, and on a German book tour a journalist basically asked me if I slept around. I guess the mystique has been chipped away for a long time now.
Agreed. It’s not the place to be coy or cute. I, personally, really like knowing the numbers of submissions if it’s a contest type thing, I guess knowing the odds is helpful to me in some way. It certainly helps me do the calculus to submit again or not. The occasional “we really enjoyed this particular section” is always nice but who has the time to do that?
That's why I like Duotrope for its statistics, though it looks like Chill Subs is doing that too, thought not with graphs and not with the same level of detail. Of course Duotrope is a paid platform....
Writers talk a lot these days about "tiered rejections" along the spectrum between form and personal response, especially when something other than a basic form reject comes from a prestigious or "dream" journal. A no is a no. I've also been amused by the "not at this time" add-on. I guess it's just another way to let us down easy.
Wasn't there a recent Lit Mag News column where an editor reported exactly that: terrible responses to rejections? Or was it broader and included those.....
I hear you. The annoyance is real. I prefer the short and professional. "Thanks for submitting to us, but we'ere going to take a pass," though, of course, I most prefer, "We loved this piece and want to publish it in our next issue." :D
Magic words, those last ones. Especially now when our work can appear so quickly online. And thanks for chiming in!
Years ago in the times of SASE, as Sheree Shatsky noted, I received a nice personal letter from a legendary SF/Fantasy mag. I kept it all these years. I was full of doubt about my writing and the editor's "you write very well" went straight to my heart, it wrapped a big warm blanket around the fact they didn't like the story :) - I don't mind the "not this time, try us again" without qualifiers, who needs the mollycoddling. I did an editorial stint recently and in some cases, I felt compelled to say why I didn't accept the story. It was always "technical": the ending feels rushed, or it doesn't match the theme of the issue. In one case, I really liked the story but felt it missed the point and I suggested a slight rewrite. The author came back with an update and we published the story. When I gave a short critique, I had doubts though. I'm just one reader, why would my opinion matter, how would the writer take it?
"Not this time, try us again" is nice, but very different from "Not for us at this time" without any invitation to try some other time. Does not at this time mean Daylight Savings Time, perhaps, or this geological time? :-)
"Not for us at this time" - - translation = "Stop bothering us & wasting your own time."
"Not this time, try us again" - - translation = "There was something we liked about your writing. Give us another try."
My daily writer's journal codes each reply; this helps me target editors and zines better.
I've tried keeping track, but end up returning to Submittable to see what might be a good lit mag to try again. I've had so many accceptances/pubs during and since the pandemic--and of course so many rejections.
If you'd like to keep a daily writer's journal (as I do), it's helpful to use the last 12 pages to record acceptances & publications + dates + your comments. Currently, I use Mead's At-A-Glance [SD-389]. As well as my stock of pens with colored inks for "codes at a glance." :-)
* * Good luck always on your numerous acceptances and dozens of book publications throughout your long successful career, Lev. * *
Thanks for the suggestion--I'm not that organized. :-) I kept a journal for writing etc. from the late 70s on but now use my journal just to write about my weekly voice lessons and the voice study work I do between them. That's about all the journal writing I have the time and energy for after decades of keeping a journal. And then most of my old journals are in Special Collections now at MSU's Library anyway. Oh, I do actually keep another skeletal journal recording my migraines, how long they lasted, what might have triggered them, etc.
Years ago, back in the days of Writer’s Market and snail mail subs, I received my SASE back from Paris Review with a handwritten note - “Have you read our journal?” Lol, I laugh (and cringe at my youthful naiveté), but yet, that handwritten note ... a badge of rejection honor! And the reader took the time to write it. Definitely frame-worthy, if I could find it!
A friend got a note that said "This is not the kind of thing we publish!!!"
I always picture PR hitting a quick reject on Submittable, so a handwritten note, someone took a couple of seconds to scratch out a backhanded rejection. Funny what writers remember!
My first acceptance after a five-year drought had me jumping up and down, literally, and the money was impressive. This was 1983, and $150 for a graduate student was big bucks.
In my lifetime, I have found many area of literature in the United States to be seriously marred by calcified hierachies more interested in power than offering gifts of talented writers.
In the schools from high school to college, we have tedious curriculums that have not changed their basic content in over fifty years. Quite often, the superintendents, principas, department chairs are fictionally illiterate and have not a clue about rising young writers anywhere between the ages of 25 and fifty. Yet these are the leaders of {education in. America).
With literary magazines, home for gfited wordsmiths everuwhere, they take SUBMISSIONS.. You submit to them. They read and you shutup. There is no dialogue. That's impossible. They have scoes, hundreds of "submissions".
You have put blood,sweat and tears into your work ( Well, most of us have. Some do one diarrhetic draft , think it's gold, send it off, and wait for God to bring the reporters. These are those I call the crazzy LAZIE=IES the amateurs who often ally with some others and form a literature group of "soubro sousiistice." Mutual therapy that hasnt seen a metaphor in thirty year tbc. But, how soon can we all changethe word submittable. to. OFFERING!
The "submission" discussion is a good one and I think that Lit Mag News had a column by an editor focused on the word and its weight this past year.
Oh, for the good old days of literary zines. Along with missing the efficient brisk business of, "We're going to pass," I also miss brief, professional bio-notes - - the ones scrubbed of overly familiar and even jaw-dropping intimate details.
What happened to a writer's mystique?
Lev, I agree - - stop praising us for being "courageous" for submitting a piece or reminding us "we're writers, too."
I remember years doing a reading in London and my English friends wincing when someone in the audience asked me a very personal question, and on a German book tour a journalist basically asked me if I slept around. I guess the mystique has been chipped away for a long time now.
OMG!!!!!!!!
He might have been making a pass, but that kind of stuff often goes over my head. :-)
Yes, exactly!
Agreed. It’s not the place to be coy or cute. I, personally, really like knowing the numbers of submissions if it’s a contest type thing, I guess knowing the odds is helpful to me in some way. It certainly helps me do the calculus to submit again or not. The occasional “we really enjoyed this particular section” is always nice but who has the time to do that?
That's why I like Duotrope for its statistics, though it looks like Chill Subs is doing that too, thought not with graphs and not with the same level of detail. Of course Duotrope is a paid platform....
Writers talk a lot these days about "tiered rejections" along the spectrum between form and personal response, especially when something other than a basic form reject comes from a prestigious or "dream" journal. A no is a no. I've also been amused by the "not at this time" add-on. I guess it's just another way to let us down easy.
Tiered as opposed to "tear-ed"? :-)
Wasn't there a recent Lit Mag News column where an editor reported exactly that: terrible responses to rejections? Or was it broader and included those.....
Yes, Lev, there was a column on dumb replies to rejections. Some writers "threatened" to never submit again. Some writers insulted the editor's taste.
Decorum + charm + diplomacy take you further. Con artists know that.
So should wordsmiths. :-)
There's an essay in those last lines! And thanks for the reminder.
Never say / write anything that you would not like to have read back to you in a courtroom in front of 12 jurors - - - my two cents.
(big smile)
Or appear on Twitter/X these days.... :-)
It's worth looking for on Becky's site, very entertaining--and bizarre.