#AWP Conference Panel on Rejection! Remember When It Was Just You and Me?

When I first started LROD in 2007, no one was talking about rejection. Now look what we did! Look at all the mice, mice! This was the view from my side of the microphone this morning at the writer's conference session entitled: Everything You Always Wanted to Know About Rejection (But Were Afraid To Ask). We've come a long way, babies.

Editor of the Atlantic Monthly on Rejection

Remember this guy (who is NOT my father)? He wrote an essay titled "How to Read a Rejection," which on the whole is very interesting. You can read it here. Consider his words of wisdom on the power dynamics involved in rejection:

As someone who has been writing letters of rejection 30 or 40 times a day for more than 35 years, I have considerable sympathy for my friend the writer-and an appreciation for the dilemma of "the editor," someone compelled to reject far more often than accept and to manage relationships with writers that are wildly lopsided. The editor has almost obscenely exaggerated power, since the ratio of candidates to published stories is so enormous (at least 1,000 to 1 at the Atlantic Monthly) and the writer's emotional stake in acceptance or rejection is so huge.

He parses out the meaning of different rejections, and offers some insight, probably nothing you don't already know.  Still, a helpful read.

C. Michael Curtis on "How to Read Rejection"

Remember this guy? C. Michael Curtis, who is not my father?  Well, he has something to say to you about rejection because he thinks your his beyotch.

Here Comes the Sun....Editor

I love it when an editor comes around and leaves a nice encouraging note for readers on Ye Old Blog. In this case, it's an editor from a fine literary magazine about a funny rejection glitch. Makes it all feel so much more human, doesn't it? Here's her comment:

My title is really Manuscript Editor. I was a reader a long time ago and when the Art Director was making new rejection letters, he put Manuscript Reader and they were printed that way. Not wanting to be wasteful and thinking nobody would really notice or care, I used them. However, if anyone receives a rejection letter these days from The Sun, you'll notice that the form has changed and now it's from The Editors. I love this blog, though, even though it was strange to come across my name in this way. I really do try to encourage writers and the main thing that keeps me working at The Sun is the fact that we go out of our way to respect the writer. And we pay them. All best, Colleen Donfield

Santa Monica and Hitler

An LROD loyalist sent in this note from on a returned/rejected story submitted to the Santa Monica Review. I guess the editor likes egomaniacal genocidal historical figures? The author of the story is taking the comment to mean, "Send more work."  I think that's a good enough interpretation.

Count Down 2011

T-minus 4 days to a mind-blowing moment. Also, Jackson Bliss, novelist and fellow blogger extraordinaire, offered up some important opines in numerical order on this LROD post; seems fair that I post what he has to say for all to read. Plus, I like what the dude has to say:

     1. My writing blog is about transparency + honesty. I post every good rejection, every snarky rejection, every acceptance + whatever else comes to my mind. You don't have to agree with that, but for you to assume I haven't considered the consequences of what I'm doing is slightly insulting + also untrue. That's just how I roll with my blog + many aspiring fiction writers have thanked me for my honesty, so i feel like i'm doing something right.
     2. Personally, I'm sick of all the kowtowing that aspiring fictions are expected to do in this industry. We're supposed to shut up + just take it until we're too famous to shut up. But I think we have important things to say BEFORE we ever become famous, which will probably be never anyway. Also, I wasn't writing back to Nat Sobel's assistant to be an asshole, I was just being honest with her + communicating to her how I feel, which honestly, people don't do ENOUGH in this industry for fear of being blacklisted. I was sincerely grateful for all of the time she spent reading my partials, but look, I don't have to agree with her analysis + I don't. I have enough friends who have already made it as literary fiction writers so I'm not being speculative when I say that I have issues with anyone suggesting that Junot Diaz has a limited readership.
     3. As for platform, though I don't agree with it, writers of color are given a "writers of color" platform by predominantly white editors. They're usually categorized as an ethnic writer, a black commercial fiction writer, a female Asian-American novelist + that's the market they target. I have nothing to do with that, but the reality is that I have a WAY better chance of selling my shit as an Asian-American writer (which I am, though only hapa) than I do as another male writer. Beyond that, a little context: In one of Nat Sobel's interviews, he argues that not only do non-fiction writers need a platform-- a position that many agents agree with, by the way--but that these days, considering how non-fiction sales have overtaken fiction sales by like a lot, now even FICTION writers need a platform, so that's what I was referring to when I talked about platform. If you read a few more of my entries, you'll see that. Also, I personally think that a fiction writer should be able to write from whatever cultural perspective s/he wants, but I think the market expects platforms: They want Asians to write Asian stories, they want the former heroin addict to write a memoir about being a junkie, not about his love of plants. Don't believe me? Pick up a copy of almost any Asian-American writer + scan their publishing history? How many of them are writing stories about white people? While I may not agree with this, I do acknowledge the market, so I'm simply trying to figure out the best way to place my own writing, nothing more.
     4. If an agent was seriously considering me + then s/he dropped me because I had too much attitude, then that agent wasn't the right agent for me, pure + simple. Great agents want great art + someone they can work with. I work so fucking hard on my writing, I'm dedicated + open to editorial suggestions + I don't have unrealistic expectations for what agents/editors do. I feel like you guyz are making a lot of assumptions about me as a writer knowing almost nothing about me + based on an entry or two. You don't fucking know me at all. And also: Your critiques of me almost suggest that the publishing industry is without flaws, but it's totally fucked up. Even my friends that are editors for commercial publishing houses are discouraged. Prominent agents are scared shitless about publishing fiction from debut authors. It's a hostile landscape to art, + yet you're criticizing me for feeling (expressing) that the industry is fucked up + that I have issues with it? That's insane. Dudes, I've interned at a major publishing house, so I know a couple of well-known editors. I have friends who are agents, literary journal stars, total unknown writers with unbelievable talent + everything in between, so I'm not talking from some solipsistic perch here. The industry is in bad shape + it's ripe for critiquing. And if you knew me + if you'd read my blog, you'd know that.
     5. For many years, I played the diplomacy game. I took each kind rejection, shut my mouth + hoped that my hard work would be enough, but now I don't want to + that doesn't make me dumb, or arrogant. It makes me human. I simply want to express how I feel + not censor myself just because I think it increases my chances of getting it published--I really don't think it does, by the way. You need talent intersecting with luck intersecting with people with power. There are tens of thousands of aspiring fiction writers who will never be published EVER + it's not because they're not talented enough, it's because some of them give up, some of them lose heart, some of them find other media to publish their voices + only a few actually make it. I'd rather hold on to my stubborn confidence, which has kept me in this game for awhile now, + by the way, has given me some fantastic responses from agents + some decent publications + a lot of hope for the future. If you disagree with my approach, I can respect that, but to call me arrogant, dumb + irritating because I have the gall to simply communicate anything besides "thank you ma'am" to an agent's assistant seems very harsh + judgmental to say the least. Additionally, I'd argue that the reason I'm getting my PhD at USC in Literature + Creative Writing is precisely it's one of the best ways to try + find a job teaching CW + finding patronage for my own art. I'm hardly unrealistic about what it takes to live/breathe as a fiction writer.
     Anyway, I thought you were creating a strawman of both me + my writing blog, so I just wanted to present the other side. I hope you'll be open to some of the things I said.

Letter From A Reformed Editor

Dear WR,

I'm a long-time reader of LROD and first want to say best of luck on your new literary journey. I just wanted to share with you and your readers my experience as a writer-turned-editor of a zine. If anyone is thinking of becoming the same thing, I hope they don't repeat my mistakes.

I have been on the receiving end of more rejections than I can count and I got the point where could no longer bear to be just another insignificant, replaceable little cog in the literary machine. I wanted to be someone who turned the crank--an editor. So in 2009 I started an online lit mag, which thank God no longer exists. I'm withholding its name because I don't want to face backlash from former contributors.

I started out as a good editor, adopted a submission policy that was painless, with just a few simple formatting guidelines that made it easier for me to upload the stories and poems to the site. Reprints and sim subs were OK by me. I sent out polite, encouraging form rejections and called authors by their names instead of "writer." I responded after a few weeks tops. I couldn't pay, but I did nominate stories for Pushcarts, Best-of-the-Webs, and tried to promote good writing.

The magazine's masthead listed several fake names of editors and readers so people wouldn't think it was just another personal website masquerading as a literary journal. In reality, there were only 1 and 1/4 people running the zine: me, and friend who occasionally read batches of poetry submissions. Looking back, it was a mistake to accept poetry. I can recognize bad poetry and know when to reject it, but I'm clueless when it comes to distinguishing between ok and good poetry.

Things went well during the first few months after its inception. I received a manageable trickle of submissions thanks to Duotrope, and I could find enough decent stories and poems to put out an issue every month or so. But as the magazine gained more of a following, reading the submissions became impossible.

The overall quality of stories decreased drastically as their number grew. In the early phase, one out of ten submissions was good enough to publish by my standards. When things got out of control, maybe one out of 250. Even if I had switched to a quarterly schedule, I wouldn't have had enough time to find enough publishable pieces.

I don't want to rag on some of the awful riterz I've had the displeasure of reading. But there was one guy who kept submitting stupid stories ripped off from episodes of popular TV shows (Lost, Mad Men, the Sopranos). Clunky prose, stilted dialogue, inconsistent use of tense and person, not knowing the difference between dessert and desert, or then and than -- and turns out this guy was a current MFA student at a university two towns over from where I lived. He's not even the worst; there was also an ESL guy from Croatia who insisted that his pieces were "endowed of top editing by top English speak." ESL man might have been a prankster; every story was a variation on man meets hooker, hooker under-delivers, man stiffs hooker.

Anyway, one weekend afternoon in late 2010, I was frantically skimming submissions trying to find at least a handful I could bear to publish. I was past the deadline and there was a backlog of months-old stories and poems that still hadn't been read. Even when I filtered out the kooks, and the idiots who sent attachments when I specifically said not to, the slush pile was winning and I was losing.

I took a deep breath and evaluated the situation objectively. Would a sane person do what I was doing? Why was I doing this? Was I getting the fulfillment of being an editor? No. And I wasn't even making good literary contacts. My writing time was being sacrificed for the sake of reading bad writing. I needed to stop immediately, and so I did.

I logged out of my submissions manager, opened up Paint, and created an image that said H4CK3D. I then logged in to my server, deleted all the files from my site, and uploaded the image. Problem solved. My online literary magazine was officially hacked and could no longer publish anything or process new submissions. I didn't notify my past contributors or the authors of pending submissions. I just tore it all down, walked away and never looked back.

It was a shitty thing to do, but really for the best. Everyone whose stories I published could resubmit them to better journals and forget the whole thing even existed. Hell, I've had my stories unpublished when online zines shut down, and I just resubmitted them elsewhere. Other editors don't care.

The experience made me realize several things that I was unaware of or had overlooked before:

• Being an editor isn't all that it's cracked up to be (unless you edit the Paris Review or New Yorker).
• Don't let "editors" get you down about your writing. Anyone can call himself an editor.
• Some editors are more aptly called "selectors," since they do very little editing. Anyone can be a selector.
• Blowhard editors, like some who have commented here, probably start out as nice people, but reading so much crap for so long will warp your attitude towards writers. I'm glad I stopped before I became a dick.
• Slow response times and curt form rejections really are nothing personal.
• The slush pile is as bad as everyone says it is. At a non-paying zine, even worse.
• On the bright side, if you are college-educated and read and write on a regular basis, your stories are probably in the top 10% of submissions. Even if you think you are a mediocre writer, there are tons of writers much worse. The fact that you can recognize mediocrity in your own writing is a point in your favor. Having to read so much dreck actually improved my self-confidence as a writer, though I don't recommend anyone try it for themselves.

How to not run a zine into the ground:

• Have an actual staff! You can't do it on your own, don't even try!
• Pay your writers. It's the right thing to do and your magazine will be better for it. If you can't make enough money from ads, subscriptions, and contest fees, you shouldn't be in this business. Exposure isn't payment.

Not to mention, how to be a better submitter:

• Follow the damn guidelines. They are not arbitrary.
• Proofread
• Don't copy another story/movie/TV show. Chances are your editor is more well-read than you think and will spot it. We're not all boobs!
• A cover letter with awards, publications, and degrees won't help you if your story sucks.
• Don't worry if you can't write a cover letter with a list of awards, publications, and degrees. Lit mags want to publish stories, not cover letters. Good writing can stand on its own.
• Thank the readers/editors for reading your submission. It may work in your favor.

And how to be a bolder submitter:

• Always sim sub.
• Never stop submitting to a journal just because they've rejected all of your previous submissions.
• Don't be afraid to resend a rejected story if you've reworked it
• If you can handle criticism, don't be afraid to ask why your submission was rejected. You might actually get a response.
• Thank the editor for his comments, even if they are idiotic and the guy's a dick. Never stoop to being a dick.

I hope that this is of value to some of your readers, thanks for taking the time to read my missive!

Sincerely,
Editor, Resigned

Publishing News Flash (Go Back to The Old Way)

This just in: Harper Perennial has figured out how to fix publishing; don't give writers big advances. Here's a highlight:

Harper Perennial’s model isn’t unique, but it’s an intriguing case study in what an imprint needs to do to distinguish itself in an increasingly stratified market. What it does is innovative and exciting, but also traditional. The imprint nurtures young writers, orchestrates creative — occasionally quite elaborate — marketing schemes, and packages its content in gorgeously designed paperback originals.  There is no star system, no bidding wars, no big names...and the imprint keeps its costs down by offering most writers modest advances for first novels and debut story collections.

Well, I do have to say that the Blockbuster, Super-Star, MacDonald's Cheeseburger Model of publishing did pretty much fuck us over, those of us who were never going to get a 6-figure advance. So, maybe it's not so terrible to scale back the horrors of capitalism-gone-mad. Seems like they've just gone back to the old way of publishing books and making them attractive to readers.

Inspiring!

An inspiring story from the editor of Anderbo:

I started writing my first short story, "Boys Who Do the Bop" in 1976 (I was born in 1950). I finished writing it in 1982 and promptly submitted it to The New Yorker -- and it was rejected. Over the next six years I submitted it to publications large and tiny (including two re-submissions to The New Yorker) but nothing but rejections came back. I wrote no other stories, just kept sending out "Boys Who Do the Bop". Then, in the spring of 1988, the story was finally accepted -- by The New Yorker! (By this time I was 37 1/2). Rick Rofihe, Publisher & Editor-in-Chief, anderbo.com

He also included his new revised rejection letter, complete with handy resource links:

Anderbo.com is an all-volunteer organization. We are able to use less than 1/2 of 1% of what comes in; most submissions receive a response within 6 to 96 hours.

Effective August 1st, 2011: Due to the increasing number of submissions we are receiving, we cannot consider more than one submission from any individual in a 3-month period. Other literary sites of interest:

http://newpages.com/literary-magazines/
http://www.pw.org/literary_magazines?apage=*
http://andromeda.rutgers.edu/~lcrew/pbonline.html
http://www.duotrope.com/listallmarkets.aspx
http://litlist.net/online_journals
http://www.litmags.org/list.php

Is Your Agent a Twit?

Apparently some of them are. Check out this list of agents who tweet and let us know if yours appears there. I'm happy to report mine does not appear on the list.

Publishing Shrinkage

Ah, breaking news from the New York Times on what's to come.  Three words, peeps: consolidation, consolidation, consolidation.

The Binkster (Binky Urban) Gets Honors

In other news, legendary agent Amanda "Binky" Urban, "of the size-4 jeans," as one of my old agent friends used to jealously call her, took home one of industry's most prestigious awards this week:  the Maxwell E. Perkins Award from the Center For Fiction. The prize was established on the deck of the sinking ship in 2005; the Center for fiction was found in 1820 as the Mercantile Library of New York and is dedicated to celebrating, supporting and furthering the creation and enjoyment of the art of fiction.  Other prize winners include Nan A. Talese (Doubleday), Gary Fisketjon (Knopf), Drenka Willen (Harcourt) Gerald Howard (Doubleday), and Jonathan Galassi, FSG). Wouldn't you like to see the short list of the non-winners? (Sonny Mehta, anyone?) Well, maybe not; guess it's sort of a snooze unless you know and care about the roster.

Is the Sky Falling?

Now what do you think a publishing publicist is going to say, Huffington Post?  "Yes! Everyone duck?"  I think not. She can't even muster more than six paragraphs to defend her argument.  More interesting is the New York Observer article she cites to detail the question of the impact of technology on film and the existence of audience.  I don't know, though, is spectacle ever really in danger of becoming extinct?

Easier Than Ever

According to GalleyCat, an announcement from Barnes & Nobles, illustrates how easy it soon will be to get distribution for your self-published books. Introducing PUBIT!. (The exclamation point is apparently part of the name, which is awfully close to pubic, no?) I think I hear the publishing industry creeping a little closer to collapse.

What Goes On Inside There?

Writer and editor Brian Doyle published this lovely piece on rejection a few years back over at the Kenyon Review blog.  It's nothing we haven't covered in our daily tedium here at LROD (quite literally), but his is so nicely written, I thought you might enjoy it anyway, especially for the up-close-and-personal view into an actual discerning editor's mind.  Here's a sample: After lo these many years as a magazine editor I have settled on a single flat sentence for my own use (“Thanks for letting me read your work, but it’s not quite right for this magazine,” a sentence I have come to love for the vast country of not quite right, into which you could cram an awful lot of sins), but I still have enduring affection for the creative no, such as this gem sent to a writer by a Chinese publication: “We have read your manuscript with boundless delight, and if we were to publish your paper, it would be impossible for us to publish any work of a lower standard. And, as it is unthinkable that in the next thousand years we shall see its equal, we are, to our regret, compelled to return your divine composition and beg you a thousand times to overlook our short sight and timidity.”

Do You Really Need An Agent?

Over at Spywriter Blog, Jack King has found a new way.  You can download his ebook for free on his site.  The book is called: "Ditch the Agent and Become a Published Writer." Here's one agent who is furiously working against the idea that agents are dinosaurs.

It's Book Buyer Eat Book Agent Eat Book Writer World

Blagent Rachelle Gardner offers an interesting industry-wide take on rejection.  Damn, she's got a lot of followers.  I guess we are a desperate sort, we writers.

2009: A Year in Rejection?

It's worth paying attention when Wylie-Merrick dole out advice on a blog, isn't it?  Read here and decide for yourself, then come back and discuss: "There’s a saying on the literary street that it’s better to have not published at all than to publish and fail."  Is that true?  I find the whole tone of the W-M blog obnoxious. (Is it just me? Or is it the the evil little blog-writing minions and their attitude?)  By the way, I've been informed that Wylie-Merrick is not the freaky dude with the scary nickname pictured left. That is in fact Andrew Wylie, who is of no relation to Wylie-Merrick Agency. It's confusing.  

A Sign of the e-Times

In case you have missed the sign posts along the way, here are some clues about the e-future:

• Random House tries to pull a fast one with electronic rights (the Authors Guild is not amused)
• Author Stephen Covey takes back the rights (and sells them to Amazon)
• Author Stephen King writes a mystery titled U/R exclusively for Amazon's Kindle (<$3.00 to purchase for your e-reader)
• Coming soon: an ebook that opens like a regular book (eDGe) with two screens so you can read a book AND browse the web simultaneously
• B&N gets into the act with the Nook
• Philips Electronics develops e-skin technology to rival e-paper

Get the picture? No wonder the publishing industry is embattled...poor fat cats are losing money, and while it means authors are also losing money (think of the music industry a few years ago), I have to say I kind of enjoy the way Interweb technology makes profiteers scramble. In the meantime, if you find yourself feeling antsy, you're not alone.  Here's a little primer on e-book rights.  Might as well get familiar now.

The Fancy People Are Here

The first self-publishing book expo was held at a Manhattan hotel on Saturday. The event featured 55 exhibitors, 12 panels, and about 200 attendees.  This Epoch Times reporter says it "drew a small but quality crowd."