On Rejections...

There has been a lot of talk on other blogs about rejections. Even (surprisingly enough) on self-publishing forums and blogs.

As a writer and publisher, I feel it only appropriate that I should chime in on both sides of the argument.

Many have stated (and will continue to state) that rejections are not only a screening process *grumbles and rolls eyes* but something that helps one grow as a writer. Rejections (especially when they start to adress your story personally as opposed to same-old form letters) are a sign that your story isn't quite up to par yet. It is indicative that it needs more revisions/editing/developing.

This is coupled with the claims that only stories who have made it through the agent/commercial publisher/editor system are any good...the snobish attitude that if you aren't commercially published, you "aren't good enough" of a writer. And, as I have said many times that is flat out bullshit.

As a writer: Yes, most rejections I have recieved have been helpful...
a sign that I needed to develop my plot further, or my characters...
(keep in mind this was almost 20 years ago and I was a newbie.) Then, aside from an occasional "return to sender" because a small press closed its doors/went out of business I would recieve statements saying "...this is not what we are looking for..." or "...we are no longer publishing fantasy..." etc.
or " is a very interesting story, however it doesn't fit in with our current marketing plans for this year..."
One even suggested a small press for me to submit it to....

Eventually I've had 3 poems published, and a short story. After a little sabbatical (in which I only wrote short items for leisure/enjoyment) I ventured into indie publishing and creating my own small press.


Therefore, speaking...
As an editor: I can see from the viewpoint of those who had rejected my stories/poems. Sincerely.
I have recieved some great, well-written manuscripts that unfortunately, I just cannot publish in Full Armor Magazine.

Either they simply don't fit into the theme(s) of the periodical, or they send a different message than what we are trying to convey...or they are (sadly) too long and exceed the maximum word count (or line count for poetry).

Have I recieved some "poorly written" works? Maybe one or two thus far...but more of works that were submitted blindly, and/or just don't fit in with the magazine.
Mind you these are well written, great stories that it pains me to exclude them.

To wrap this up neatly:
If you recieve a rejection it doesn't always mean that you aren't a good writer, or that your manuscript needs a lot of work...it just may be that you haven't submitted it to the most appropriate agent/editor/publishing house.

I admit that when I saught the traditional path I did a bad job of targeting markets, and keeping up on trends in literature and/or which companies were closing their doors/ceasing publication.

Good stories do get rejected just as often as "bad" stories do. Rejections shouldn't really be taken as an insult (unless you get a really unprofessional editor/agent who berates your story down to the very ink it is printed on. This happened to me only once, and it was no surprise that the small press went out of business about 6 monts later).

Sometimes it just means you need to research markets better (or develop your own indie press and do it yourself!)