One of our playwriting readers sent this standard rejection from Eatfest, noting that the rejection doesn't even bother to personalize the form letter with the name of the play:
From: Paul Adams
Date: June 10, 2008 6:53:25 AM EDT
Subject: Your one act submission
Thank you for submitting your one act for consideration for our Fall Eatfest. Unfortunately, it did not move to the semi final round. I do wish you luck with it in other venues. I look forward to reading more of your work in the future.
The writer's pithy response to the rejection? "Eat me."
5 comments:
Eh, I don't see the big deal. They didn't personalize with the name of the play, but even if they had, a form rejection is a form rejection. I'd prefer a speedier form rejection without my title in it than a form rejection that tries to pretend it's not a form rejection by plugging in a few measley details that takes longer to arrive. It would be nice, of course, if all editors gave detailed feedback in rejections at all levels, but that's just not realistic.
I think I just saw a tumbleweed.
I know, right? Quiet around here.
Too quiet, Captain.
It's a common enough rejection form, and once you've made the rounds a bit more, you'll understand that theatres that offer a personalized rejection on the first round of cuts are far and few between -- usually there's no where near the personnel to comment further than yes, no, or maybe on a box of submissions. It's actually a sign that you're doing better as a playwright when you start getting rejection letters that at least mention the name of your play in the body of the letter, or specifically mention something they liked about the piece before offering sincere regrets -- it means you've at least progressed past the yes,no, maybe stage and there's been some discussion somewhere in the organization on the merits of your piece. If you want to be a playwright, you're going to have to get some thicker skin.
Post a Comment