when I started this blog five years ago, I was a pet sitter and the name animal-crackers made sense. now I'm a stay-at-home-dad and freelance writer, but rather than confuse everyone by getting a different blog, it's just easier to keep posting things here.
Monday, June 27, 2005
Thanks. But no thanks.
"Thank you for sending your story to SCI FICTION. I'm afraid we don't feel we can use it for our website. Sorry."
That's the rejection letter I received in the mail today. Over the past 18 months I've received 17 brush-offs. It's disappointing, but part of the game.
What sucks about rejections is the amount of time it takes to receive them. (Since my memory stinks, I track my submissions in a spreadsheet.) The Gettysburg Review took 220 days to tell me to piss off. Second place goes to Convergence magazine, which after 161 days still hasn't sent me a letter. (I have eight submissions floating around out there unanswered.)
At the other end there's the Dana Literary Society and the Small Spiral Notebook. Both told me thanks-but-no-thanks after 14 days. Of course, these publications accept and reject submissions online.
The more recognizable outlets fall somewhere in the middle. SCI FICTION (brought to you by the SciFi Channel) rejected in 42 days. Asimov's, 43 days. The New Yorker, 41 days.
The other part of the rejection game that sucks is many magazines and journals don't accept simultaneous submissions. That means if they find out you've sent the same story to another publication, their chili-fed water buffalos defecate on the manuscript before it's returned.
How the hell they enforce this policy, I have no idea. I guess most writers have such high hopes for their stories, they don't want to chance it. Me, I'm afraid of water buffalos.
So now that SCI FICTION has shown me the finger, it's time to bust out the Writer's Market guide.
That's the rejection letter I received in the mail today. Over the past 18 months I've received 17 brush-offs. It's disappointing, but part of the game.
What sucks about rejections is the amount of time it takes to receive them. (Since my memory stinks, I track my submissions in a spreadsheet.) The Gettysburg Review took 220 days to tell me to piss off. Second place goes to Convergence magazine, which after 161 days still hasn't sent me a letter. (I have eight submissions floating around out there unanswered.)
At the other end there's the Dana Literary Society and the Small Spiral Notebook. Both told me thanks-but-no-thanks after 14 days. Of course, these publications accept and reject submissions online.
The more recognizable outlets fall somewhere in the middle. SCI FICTION (brought to you by the SciFi Channel) rejected in 42 days. Asimov's, 43 days. The New Yorker, 41 days.
The other part of the rejection game that sucks is many magazines and journals don't accept simultaneous submissions. That means if they find out you've sent the same story to another publication, their chili-fed water buffalos defecate on the manuscript before it's returned.
How the hell they enforce this policy, I have no idea. I guess most writers have such high hopes for their stories, they don't want to chance it. Me, I'm afraid of water buffalos.
So now that SCI FICTION has shown me the finger, it's time to bust out the Writer's Market guide.
3 Comments:
They suck and don't know what they're missing. Someone will value your work and then, boom! It's off to the big time.
Andree
ditto what your wife said. She's fairly smart when she's not being a total doofus.
(delayed )rejection sucks Todd - just don't become like the Confederacy of Dunces writer. What's the use with being a postmortuemly published? You want success to help you (pick up women) and provide for your family (pick up women), leave a legacy for your kids(pick up women), put one up on those old school snobs who used to tease you (pick up women), and buy a flash new car (pick up women)
In case your motivation is different to my own, I am prepared, on your behalf, to pretend to be Publishedtodd (to pick up women)
Post a Comment
<< Home