Search This Blog

Tuesday, June 12, 2007

No-Signature Rejection

The handwritten rejection says: "Smooth, polished prose, an intriguing story, but in the end I wanted more from the characters and perhaps from the narrative itself. (The ending is sweet, but slightly too sentimental to work here, I think.) But there are some wonderful moments here--please try us again--Also, please note that Linda Asher is no longer with the magazine--"

Dude--if you’re going to expect more from my characters and call my work "too sentimental," but still invite me back to your desk for one more little tea party of rejection, at least sign your name.

As demonstrated by the fact that I went back to Linda Asher for more punishment (this time without lesbians), but got you instead, I clearly do not hold grudges. It makes me feel that maybe you don’t really want me to try "us" again.

Nonetheless, I do appreciate that you took the time to inform me of Linda Asher’s sad fate: “no longer with the magazine.” (That’s what she said about Dan Menaker.) Is that a euphemism, or something?

Also, why no salutation? Why no date? Why no sign off? Have you really no respect for the Writer, Rejected? Or are you just too busy enjoying your seat?

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

??? This makes no sense. The editor took the time to write a handwritten note on your form rejection. You want to get mad because he didn't sign it? Bull. You want to show off that you got that far. AND YOU SHOULD. Congratulations. That's a GREAT rejection. Just be honest about it. If, on the other hand, you were serious, and you really just want to comaplain, then do soemthing about it. Show them a thing or two and quit submitting to The New Yorker. That will make them weep. (I still say congrats.)