Friday, March 7, 2014

A New Digital New Yorker Rejection is in Play

I received the following notice from an LROD reader, who received a new (signed) New Yorker digital rejection that varies from our last digital report:
I have received the standard rejection reply from the New Yorker magazine many times. This last however was different.
Dear (my name): We are grateful for the opportunity to read and consider your new work. We are very much regret that we are unable to carry it in the magazine. We do, however look forward to reading more when the time comes. Sincerely, Paul Muldoon (poetry editor) and Elizabeth Denison (poetry coordinator)
What does this mean? I'm not obtuse. Maybe paranoid. Does anyone think this is positive or a tiered response or "here's a nice way to reject your work so that you don't go postal on our offices?" 

4 comments:

Anonymous said...

From my own research into the matter, this appears to be a tiered response, not the standard rejection.

Writer, Rejected said...

You think the NY-er does tiered rejections? That would be news. I thought it was standard or personal. Am I wrong? Can you supply the standardized tiers? If so, I will post your theory up the flagpole.

Anonymous said...

I got the same rejection. I checked, and something I'd sent to them in 2010 had a different invitation, without the part about their seeing more work. Maybe this new rejection is a tiered one, or maybe they've just changed their standard rejection note.

Anonymous said...

http://www.rejectionwiki.com/index.php?title=The_New_Yorker This explains--it was tiered!