And I (barely) resisted the impulse to compare any of the examples above with those ones that live on my computer in a folder labelled “GTBKM”—because, at the end of the day, when a form rejection arrive and begins, “desr Poate,” followed by four paragraphs, a button to donate to save the marsupials, and purchase a discounted five-year subscription . . .
sometimes, it’s worth splurging on a Ben& Jerry’s “Babies are Creamy Too.”
I submit this example of my award-winning literary style with the full understanding that it is possibly a bit too innovative for your rather promising magazine. I realize that you have many choices to make and voices to please, as you must necessarily aim for the middle despite your pledge to reach for the top. I get it, I truly do! I submit it nonetheless to give you a sense of what is possible. I know that you will continue in your efforts to achieve a stellar standing among your peers, even at the expense of rejecting this piece. You have my best wishes for your future efforts!
And with a bit of revision, here's your submission letter, reformulated as the ideal rejection letter:
Dear Writer:
We humbly recognize that your award-winning literary style is, indeed, too innovative for our wee magazine. We have many choices to make and voices to please, as we must necessarily aim for the middle despite our pledge to reach for the top. Committing to publish work at the same level as your sublime submission would, necessarily, impossibly limit the scope of what we could in good conscience publish in the future; it would be akin to serving tomato velouté with basil emulsion and parmesan crisp as an amuse-bouche and boxed mac-and-cheese as the main. Just wouldn't fly. Your writing, however, cheers us in providing a sense of what is possible. We will continue in our efforts to achieve a stellar standing among our peers, even at the expense of rejecting this piece. You have our best wishes for your future efforts!
Love it: "I realize that you have many choices to make and voices to please, as you must necessarily aim for the middle despite your pledge to reach for the top."
I read your “submission letter” and it really is a marvel. I think snark—for me, anyway—is easier to write than sincerity. The latter devolves so easily into pablum. Of course, snark is a mask, not just a weapon, which is precisely why I love it.
I enjoy both modes. MY first editor at St. Martin's Press encouraged me to write a snarky academic mystery, which turned into a series and got me reviewed in the NYTBR.
"What is that je ne sais quoi? We wish we could tell you. Please consider ordering a back issue or seven. If you find out, let us know."
and also
"We encourage you to keep writing, keep submitting, keep ignoring any negative subtext you might be gleaning from this rejection. Taste is totally subjective and this rejection says absolutely nothing about the writer that you think you are."
That last little sting in the tail got an out loud chuckle of appreciation.
Thank you so very much for your insightful, careful read. I have to admit that line was one of my favorites.
I'm an anglophile, have been reading British literature since I was a kid and of course watching British films and TV series and enjoy dry humor. Once in London I laughed so hard during an adaptation of a P.G. Wodehouse novel that I almost slid out of my seat and stopped the show.
I enjoyed the essay. It didn't improve my opinion of editors or make me to read litmags more or spend more time or money on them. But now litmag rejection bothers me less since it comes from people I respect less than I did before. Maybe it's called "submission" for a reason.
I've spent as little as possible submitting to lit mags though I have sampled their work, but always start with their mission statement and if it feels like a place for me, that's guidance I follow.
Some litmags these days are so ballsy with fees and the justification for them it actually took me a moment to realize that this is satire "where we charge a modest fee of $12 per submission to guarantee high quality and keep us in the lit mix."
An example of how humor gets closer to the truth than seriousness.
You could have written a sober-minded screed about how lit magazines are run by the same kinds of people who sit on country club membership committees.
But no! You took the route of sarcasm and you hit the bulls eye.
This a tour de force of literary snark! The whole time I was reading it, I had a big, goofy grin plastered all over my face. To borrow from the world of the cinema, I love the smell of snark in the morning!
There are one or two places that send out rejections almost as nauseating as these. I much prefer a form rejection to a patronising attempt to soften the blow.
"...and rest *assured* that we *genuinely hope* you don't let this discourage you from creating and sharing your art with [Lady Catherine]. [She] *demands* [your voice] be heard!" Now I just want a full set written in this style. 😁
The finished product was burnished by Becky who is one of the best editors I've worked with. She's clear, insightful, doesn't try to take over the piece, and her suggestions always ring true. Go Becky!
Based on some of these comments, I think there are a bunch of spoiled children out there (even the ones my age) who need to learn more and whine less. It would be lovely if the editorial staff could include examples of why the piece was ultimately rejected. But for most lit mags, that's just impossible. Writers should join workshops and writers groups that critique each other. You'll learn a lot more. Having said that, this was probably a poor choice for a newsletter to share with your writers. I've worked in the field most of my adult life and I totally get the sarcastic thoughts you wish you could include with a rejection, but these writers are supporting the very existence of the lit mag and deserve constructive but honest and respectful advice This ego-feed is not it.
1) I am not an editor of any magazine and never have been. I am a full-time author.
2) This is a *satire* inspired by writers right here on various substacks who have complained about rejection letters they felt were unctuous and even patronizing.
3) If I were a lit mag editor, I would *never* say anything like what's expressed here or even think it. I was mentored by a loving, nurturing writer and that's what I pass on to my students and writers whom I edit. I am never sarcastic in those situations. There's no need to be.
4 The editor of Lit Mag News inspired me to make this satire even more over-the-top and I did so with her help. Becky Tuch is a terrific editor with a great sense of humor.
Fantastic satire. No need to defend yourself. Great satire always triggers some irrational pearl-clutching among certain people, which proves it has done its job!
I must be honest and say I have not read several issues of the lit mags I submit to. I’ll read a couple of stories and breeze through several issues. There’s just not time to thoroughly read every issue I want to submit to. So when I get rejected I can’t complain. As gatekeeper for the radio show I produce heard on 1,000 commercial stations, I know what works for us and what doesn’t which makes some authors/publicists scratch their heads when they believe they have the perfect topic or guest. I know this column was satire, but the je ne sais quoi was accurate. And because it would take so much time to explain why a guest or topic isn’t right for us my colleagues and I just say thanks but I’ll pass.
That's a wise choice. This satire was inspired by comments by various substackers who agree with you and wished editors didn't work so hard to make them feel better.
You forgot to add “Please record your rejection on Duotrope, because our high rejection rate inflates our egos.”
I'm glad you got that this was satire.
Not sure why that isn't obvious to many of the pearl-clutchers here...
Good question. Becky Tuch and I worked together on making this as sharp as we could.
The most deadly satire hits a nerve as it should.
Ha ha, good one!
I laughed.
I cried.
And I (barely) resisted the impulse to compare any of the examples above with those ones that live on my computer in a folder labelled “GTBKM”—because, at the end of the day, when a form rejection arrive and begins, “desr Poate,” followed by four paragraphs, a button to donate to save the marsupials, and purchase a discounted five-year subscription . . .
sometimes, it’s worth splurging on a Ben& Jerry’s “Babies are Creamy Too.”
I *loved* your comment and your sense of humor. Thanks for writing in the spirit of the essay.
Dear Editor:
I submit this example of my award-winning literary style with the full understanding that it is possibly a bit too innovative for your rather promising magazine. I realize that you have many choices to make and voices to please, as you must necessarily aim for the middle despite your pledge to reach for the top. I get it, I truly do! I submit it nonetheless to give you a sense of what is possible. I know that you will continue in your efforts to achieve a stellar standing among your peers, even at the expense of rejecting this piece. You have my best wishes for your future efforts!
And with a bit of revision, here's your submission letter, reformulated as the ideal rejection letter:
Dear Writer:
We humbly recognize that your award-winning literary style is, indeed, too innovative for our wee magazine. We have many choices to make and voices to please, as we must necessarily aim for the middle despite our pledge to reach for the top. Committing to publish work at the same level as your sublime submission would, necessarily, impossibly limit the scope of what we could in good conscience publish in the future; it would be akin to serving tomato velouté with basil emulsion and parmesan crisp as an amuse-bouche and boxed mac-and-cheese as the main. Just wouldn't fly. Your writing, however, cheers us in providing a sense of what is possible. We will continue in our efforts to achieve a stellar standing among our peers, even at the expense of rejecting this piece. You have our best wishes for your future efforts!
With gratitude that you even considered us,
Sharon, this is perfection!
Thanks, Sharon and Lev! If we're not vigilant, this could quickly get out of hand!
Love it: "I realize that you have many choices to make and voices to please, as you must necessarily aim for the middle despite your pledge to reach for the top."
Won-der-ful!
Isn't it refreshing to appreciate that satire has many sides! Thank you.
I read your “submission letter” and it really is a marvel. I think snark—for me, anyway—is easier to write than sincerity. The latter devolves so easily into pablum. Of course, snark is a mask, not just a weapon, which is precisely why I love it.
I enjoy both modes. MY first editor at St. Martin's Press encouraged me to write a snarky academic mystery, which turned into a series and got me reviewed in the NYTBR.
Brilliantly written with tongue firmy in cheek. I will now look for these phrases among the usual 'form rejection' bingo :)
I am sure I have received watered down versions of a couple of your suggestions.
I'm so glad you enjoyed it and appreciated the broad satire.
I'm British, we get dry humour :)
I particularly liked
"What is that je ne sais quoi? We wish we could tell you. Please consider ordering a back issue or seven. If you find out, let us know."
and also
"We encourage you to keep writing, keep submitting, keep ignoring any negative subtext you might be gleaning from this rejection. Taste is totally subjective and this rejection says absolutely nothing about the writer that you think you are."
That last little sting in the tail got an out loud chuckle of appreciation.
"The writer you think you are" was my favorite part too 😆
That "negative subtext" is priceless!
:-)
Thank you so very much for your insightful, careful read. I have to admit that line was one of my favorites.
I'm an anglophile, have been reading British literature since I was a kid and of course watching British films and TV series and enjoy dry humor. Once in London I laughed so hard during an adaptation of a P.G. Wodehouse novel that I almost slid out of my seat and stopped the show.
I definitely have received some of those.
Sometimes it’s obvious from the website that this is what’s coming.
True. They do have a tendency to telegraph their punches.
So you're saying the form rejection letter I wrote that said "get out of here with this crap" was a bad idea then? :-)
Thanks for the laugh today!
I enjoyed the essay. It didn't improve my opinion of editors or make me to read litmags more or spend more time or money on them. But now litmag rejection bothers me less since it comes from people I respect less than I did before. Maybe it's called "submission" for a reason.
I've spent as little as possible submitting to lit mags though I have sampled their work, but always start with their mission statement and if it feels like a place for me, that's guidance I follow.
Some litmags these days are so ballsy with fees and the justification for them it actually took me a moment to realize that this is satire "where we charge a modest fee of $12 per submission to guarantee high quality and keep us in the lit mix."
An example of how humor gets closer to the truth than seriousness.
You could have written a sober-minded screed about how lit magazines are run by the same kinds of people who sit on country club membership committees.
But no! You took the route of sarcasm and you hit the bulls eye.
Thanks!
This a tour de force of literary snark! The whole time I was reading it, I had a big, goofy grin plastered all over my face. To borrow from the world of the cinema, I love the smell of snark in the morning!
So glad you had fun with it! It was designed to amuse.
Enjoyed reading this, Lev. Thanks so much.
There are one or two places that send out rejections almost as nauseating as these. I much prefer a form rejection to a patronising attempt to soften the blow.
Thanks. I'm glad you enjoyed it. I too like rejections short and sweet.
That last sample letter works particularly well if read in the voice of David Bamber's Mr Collins.
OMG, that's perfect! He was hilarious and a real scene stealer.
"...and rest *assured* that we *genuinely hope* you don't let this discourage you from creating and sharing your art with [Lady Catherine]. [She] *demands* [your voice] be heard!" Now I just want a full set written in this style. 😁
“Accessible but totally elite.” Nailed it.
You master that pompous smugness! Thank you for the laugh :)
Glad you enjoyed it!
Spot on, which is why I'm crying (jk)
Thanks for reading and responding.
The finished product was burnished by Becky who is one of the best editors I've worked with. She's clear, insightful, doesn't try to take over the piece, and her suggestions always ring true. Go Becky!
Based on some of these comments, I think there are a bunch of spoiled children out there (even the ones my age) who need to learn more and whine less. It would be lovely if the editorial staff could include examples of why the piece was ultimately rejected. But for most lit mags, that's just impossible. Writers should join workshops and writers groups that critique each other. You'll learn a lot more. Having said that, this was probably a poor choice for a newsletter to share with your writers. I've worked in the field most of my adult life and I totally get the sarcastic thoughts you wish you could include with a rejection, but these writers are supporting the very existence of the lit mag and deserve constructive but honest and respectful advice This ego-feed is not it.
1) I am not an editor of any magazine and never have been. I am a full-time author.
2) This is a *satire* inspired by writers right here on various substacks who have complained about rejection letters they felt were unctuous and even patronizing.
3) If I were a lit mag editor, I would *never* say anything like what's expressed here or even think it. I was mentored by a loving, nurturing writer and that's what I pass on to my students and writers whom I edit. I am never sarcastic in those situations. There's no need to be.
4 The editor of Lit Mag News inspired me to make this satire even more over-the-top and I did so with her help. Becky Tuch is a terrific editor with a great sense of humor.
Fantastic satire. No need to defend yourself. Great satire always triggers some irrational pearl-clutching among certain people, which proves it has done its job!
Thanks for pointing that out. I'm surprised people would read a line like the one about cockatoos and not get that this was satire.
Get a grip.
I must be honest and say I have not read several issues of the lit mags I submit to. I’ll read a couple of stories and breeze through several issues. There’s just not time to thoroughly read every issue I want to submit to. So when I get rejected I can’t complain. As gatekeeper for the radio show I produce heard on 1,000 commercial stations, I know what works for us and what doesn’t which makes some authors/publicists scratch their heads when they believe they have the perfect topic or guest. I know this column was satire, but the je ne sais quoi was accurate. And because it would take so much time to explain why a guest or topic isn’t right for us my colleagues and I just say thanks but I’ll pass.
That's a wise choice. This satire was inspired by comments by various substackers who agree with you and wished editors didn't work so hard to make them feel better.