# Kick in the head rejection



## MichelD (Mar 14, 2019)

Got a note today:


"I read your m/s and have to decline. It was too technical for me in its
present state with a lot of the action being conveyed in a Q&A format -
this makes the writing rather pedestrian and obvious. You need to find
less obvious ways to convey what is happening to the reader.
Hope this helps, and I hope you continue to work on it."


At least he read my novel. I've never even showed more than a couple chapters to others.

I'm not even sure what he means or how to fix what he sees as the main flaw.

I don't know what  to do now. I'm 70,000 words into a new project.

I don't feel like rewriting a book I thought I finished four years ago.


----------



## Amnesiac (Mar 14, 2019)

While rejection is never a pleasant thing, at least s/he took the time to give you something to work with. Maybe just put it on the back burner until you are finished with your current project, and then revisit it when you are in a better frame of mind... Sorry you didn't get the nod. Best wishes with your new project, and with your submission if/when you decide to rework it a bit...


----------



## Olly Buckle (Mar 14, 2019)

This is the reaction of one person, people frequently get multiple rejections followed by an acceptance. You may come round to feeling like re-writing, that you don't right now is very understandable, but these things can change.


----------



## SueC (Mar 14, 2019)

Michel, at least you have had a read! A lot of writers don't even get that, but there must be something there because of the feedback. Otherwise, why would they bother? Yes, I agree with keeping on with your current project. Later, if you feel so inclined, re-read the reject and see where you can apply his words. Good luck and keep going!


----------



## Ralph Rotten (Mar 14, 2019)

Dood: I have had prolly a thousand rejections, and few of them were as good as that.
He read it enough to give solid feedback.
Usually you get a form letter. A few times I got a bad copy of a copy of a copy of a form letter...and it had a coffee ring on it.

I suggest getting the thing beta-tested and see what they say.
Also, if it was 4 years ago, your writing may have evolved greatly since then.
Move on and write more stuff.  Not everything gets published.


----------



## Squalid Glass (Mar 14, 2019)

I agree with the other posters in this thread, but my goodness, what an industry where a rejection like that is actually quite a rare positive. No wonder so few people actually stick with it until they're published.


----------



## JJBuchholz (Mar 15, 2019)

I've been there, and I can tell you that the only way you can go is up. Last year I had many, and I mean MANY rejections to manuscripts I sent to publishers, some with harder shots then the one you received. Yes, it's disheartening, and can knock you down several pegs. The thing is, I kept going, made some edits, and improved upon my writing style. Near the end of last year, after all of those rejections, one publisher finally accepted one of my works of fiction. 

Up until that point, I had been shopping my manuscripts around for nearly two years, with no luck. You will eventually get an acceptance, and it will take the monkey off your back and give you more drive and determination to succeed and raise yourself to another level.

Never give up, and NEVER stop writing.

-JJB


----------



## Ralph Rotten (Mar 15, 2019)

"Never give up, never surrender!"
The Commander


----------



## moderan (Mar 15, 2019)

Editors don't have time to critique your manuscript. If they don't see it as salable for their house, just move on. It's a numbers game. Don't get emotionally attached to the copy. Read widely, find someplace that seems to fit your style, try that. I sold a piece last week that I've been submitting on and off, with gradual improvements, since I was a teenager. The first rejection was signed by Ed Ferman.


----------



## Gillian Dance (Mar 15, 2019)

Hi Michel D,
sorry to hear about the rejection, still seemed to have a fairly positive tone to it... I recently finished reading a book called "Rejection Proof" (how to beat fear and become invincible). It was recommended to me by a friend and it has really helped me to deal with rejections, which are par for the course as a writer but so hard to take sometimes. I just want to share some statistics with you that were in this book for how many times some really famous authors were rejected by publishers before someone finally accepted their work:

Lord of the Flies/ William Goulding - 20 times
The Diary of a Young Girl/ Anne Frank - 15 times
Carrie/ Stephen King - 30 times
Dubliners/ James Joyce - 22 times
The Help/ Kathryn Stockett (which also became a movie) - 60 times!!!
Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone/ J.K.Rowling (now a massive $$$franchise!) 12 times

etc.etc.
Hope that motivates you a bit to keep going. What one publisher doesn't appreciate another will. Good luck, believe in yourself and keep it up.
Best wishes Gillian.


----------



## Amnesiac (Mar 15, 2019)

Gillian, this is what I was trying to get at. I knew Stephen King and J.K. Rowling had dealt with amazing levels of rejection. Crazy.... I'll bet there are some publishers out there kicking themselves in the ass! LOL!


----------



## MichelD (Mar 15, 2019)

OP here. I've only recently got into writing fiction again. I wrote three novels in the 1980s but got a journalism job in 1990 and only retired last year. That sucked the fiction writing mojo out of me for nearly 28 years.  I needed the time off for family and other pursuits. Anyway,  I did submit one ms to an agent in 1988 and she turned it down, but she was friends of friends and lived in the neighbourhood so we had a chance to talk face-to-face about it. She said my alcoholic private detective was a cliched figure (he was) and the story not that interesting. Okay fair enough.

But being business-minded (Well, I guess that's what agents are supposed to be) she reminded me that publishers usually lose money on a first novel and want to get involved with someone young enough and promising enough to stick with and get them  more widely known and make money for everyone with subsequent books.  I got the hint that she was telling me that  I was over the hill. And  I was 35!


I have had rejection letters and or notes dating back those 31 years. Nowadays  they don't even bother with that. They can't seem to afford a slip of  paper and a stamp. You just email a manuscript off into the ozone and if  you don't hear from them in 2 or 3 months, that means they are not  interested.

Let me tell you what happened last year:

A publisher had my manuscript for  over two  months and I didn't hear back from them.

They had acknowledged receipt of the ms so I had the editor's name. I  emailed her numerous times asking her if her decision was Yay or Nay  with no response at all.

Therefore I looked her up on Facebook and sure enough, there she was, so I  sent her a pm on Facebook.

Well Holy Smoke!!!!  You should have seen the response.  I should have  saved it. She said that I was conducting entirely inappropriate and  offensive behaviour and that I had no business at all contacting her on  Facebook and that I must never ever contact her again like that. She  effectively accused me of stalking her.

Well, shortly  after that she sent me an email from the office saying  yes, she had rejected the book, reminding me that she had said in her  responding letter that if I didn't hear from her in two months, then  they weren't interested. She added that it was not permitted to contact  editors personally.

To be honest , they had published two of a friend's books in a similar  vein (West Coast Canada boat-based mystery/thriller) and  I  was  convinced that my book was as good as his and that they'd surely accept  it. I might have been a little overconfident and wanted to know for sure  yes or no before proceeding to pitch it elsewhere. I had as asked in  their requirements, offered it to them as an exclusive submission.

As far as contacting  her on FB, well, I was a journalist for 28 years; I  know how to find people, and besides, when you post your name, your  photo, holiday and family pics on FB, it's hardly a secret is it?

Anyway, immediately after that she removed herself from Facebook.


----------



## moderan (Mar 15, 2019)

So unprofessional. I contacted an editor under similar circumstances and she thanked me, said that she hadn't read the ms and would take a look. Still a bounce but I felt better about it. I network with editors on a regular basis. People like CC Finlay and Ellen Datlow are on my FB friends list and I have had communications with them. And I'm nobody. There are reasons why they're at the top of their profession. Good role models...I'm an editor. And now a publisher. 
I'm not always nice but I try to be fair.


----------



## Ralph Rotten (Mar 15, 2019)

MichelD: I gotta side with the editor. You said you emailed her multiple times, then tried to contact via FB.
That's some bad hat, Harry.

Send your queries, but don't hold your breath until they come back. Just move on to new queries to new publishers/agents.
The only reason to even keep track of queries is so you know where you have already applied.
As for follow up, don't bother.


Mod; followup prolly worked for you because of professional courtesy. But it rarely works for new writers who have no relationship with the publisher. In fact, they hate dat chit.


----------



## MichelD (Mar 15, 2019)

I don't even know what "That's bad hat Harry"  means.

Yes  I emailed her with no reply so I took other steps.

If she didn't have the politeness to take 10 seconds to write "Thanks but no thanks" in a return email I remain unapologetic.

Pre-Internet they would take the time to at least post a form letter. 

Now in this instant communication era someone can't even take seconds to hammer out a few words into an email? I'll say no more.







Ralph Rotten said:


> MichelD: I gotta side with the editor. You said you emailed her multiple times, then tried to contact via FB.
> That's some bad hat, Harry.
> 
> Send your queries, but don't hold your breath until they come back. Just move on to new queries to new publishers/agents.
> ...


----------



## luckyscars (Mar 15, 2019)

MichelD said:


> I don't even know what "That's bad hat Harry"  means.
> 
> Yes  I emailed her with no reply so I took other steps.
> 
> ...



You were out of order.

First of all, you need to consider for context that creative industry people do get some pretty deranged/obsessive people. Likely more than a few who take rejection extremely poorly...

Generally, Facebook is not considered an appropriate platform for tapping up a prospective (or current, for that matter) business connection. It just isn't. The fact that some, as moderan mentioned, are happy to correspond through there is irrelevant: It's not a platform designed for business solicitations between total strangers without both parties' consent. In fact, I'm pretty sure that's against Facebook's Terms Of Service. Strike One for you.

Coupled with that, Facebook is people put photos of their kids and check in to their favorite ice cream joint, so there's a safety factor. The editor had every right to respond harshly to what she felt was an overstep, _e__specially _since she had put in the submission requirements that if you did not hear back from her in 2 months consider it rejected. It appeared you did not read her submission requirements properly, or else (and more insidiously from her POV), you were too full of yourself to think they applied. That is Strike Two.

Sorry if the above is harsh but the level of entitlement is astounding. You complain about people not taking the time but time is money; a few seconds to type out an email multiplied by dozens and dozens of people who also expect their 'few second email' in addition to other business (believe it or not, that is a thing) adds up to a twelve hour day pretty quickly. It's just not your business to say how much time people do or do not have for you. Thus, you just lost somebody who might have bought your work in the future. Strike Three.


----------



## moderan (Mar 15, 2019)

I find that all so much hooey. Times are changing and in my mind that editor was being oversensitive...granted that I agree that the pursuit of publication was somewhat over-the-top. But the description of the language involved was also over-the-top. The big five editors I know make themselves available and responsible for such things...also, I find that "If you don't hear from us by..." to be extremely unprofessional and unresponsive to the marketplace. One has to stand by one's own decisions.


----------



## luckyscars (Mar 15, 2019)

moderan said:


> I find that all so much hooey. Times are changing and in my mind that editor was being oversensitive...granted that I agree that the pursuit of publication was somewhat over-the-top. But the description of the language involved was also over-the-top. The big five editors I know make themselves available and responsible for such things...also, I find that "If you don't hear from us by..." to be extremely unprofessional and unresponsive to the marketplace. One has to stand by one's own decisions.



I am not saying I think this person was or was not oversensitive, mod, because I don't know all the info. I am saying irrespective of the editor being unprofessional and/or oversensitive, the OP _definitely_ acted unprofessionally and foolishly. And in this case I'm not willing to throw names at the agent just yet, because:

- We don't know what the OP said in his private message to her, as of course he did not quote it.
- We don't know the exact verbiage of the editor's reply to assess the OP's biased interpretation of it.
- We don't know which editor this is, their submission terms, or how clearly these are submitted on their website.

What we do know: Some dude looked up a stranger's Facebook account to try to pressure them into making a business decision in his favor. 

The big name editors you mention may well use their social media differently. I'll take your word for that. I assume most of them _can _operate differently because they have people to help them with the slush pile. 

Either way, it's irrelevant. We are talking about _this _editor and comparing them to what is standard among _all _agents, not just the big boys: We aren't comparing a lemonade stand to The Coca Cola Company, we are comparing a lemonade stand to other lemonade stands. I can say for sure it is totally normal to get no response to a submission: I have submitted hundreds of stories over the years and probably less than half got any sort of reply at all. 

So, either more than half of them are 'unprofessional' or indeed 'times have changed' and we writers expect too damn much. Either way, it matters not.


----------



## Ralph Rotten (Mar 15, 2019)

Look, you can argue all day long about if you were right or wrong, but the proof is in the pudding: that editor will never look at ANY of your work again, you are dead to them.
So right, wrong, left, right, the ultimate result was a permanent NO.

So, is it rude for the editor to not get back to you? Yes.
Is it atypical in this business? Not at all.
Are they wrong for not getting back to you in a timely manner? Not in this business.
Do they owe you an explanation? No.

And FYI: even back in the days of SASE queries, easily a quarter of the publishers never replied.
The ones that did usually did it with the absolute worst copy of a form letter they could find.












"That's some bad hat, Harry."
It's a line from Jaws.


----------



## Sir-KP (Mar 16, 2019)

Honestly, I'd consider FB as personal space. Unless you're close friend (adding as friend in FB doesn't mean jacksh*t), I'd suggest to keep business communication strictly through business contact.

Not replying really suck major balls. I've been dealing with these professionals when I was looking for job in the past few years. Not replying back means either they are still in review or you're simply done for. Contacting them for an update is acceptable. But once they give no reply, then it's safe to just consider yourself failed.

I understand on the notion about being in simpler digital era and yet they still can't type a few words of confirmation. But we have to look at ourselves. We are nobody. If we were Stephen King or JK Rowling, then you can bet they'd piss in their pants looking forward to your replies.


----------



## Olly Buckle (Mar 16, 2019)

Many, many years ago (60?) as a teenager I submitted stuff and sent it with a self addressed envelope, if you were lucky you got it back, if you were very lucky you got it back with a reject slip for the collection. I have to agree with Ralph Rotten, this is absolute bog standard norm for the industry, established over years, and if you chase and argue you will end up on a black list, unread by anyone.


----------



## moderan (Mar 16, 2019)

Ralph Rotten said:


> Look, you can argue all day long about if you were right or wrong, but the proof is in the pudding: that editor will never look at ANY of your work again, you are dead to them.
> So right, wrong, left, right, the ultimate result was a permanent NO.
> 
> So, is it rude for the editor to not get back to you? Yes.
> ...



This is all true. But I'll argue it all day long. I like arguing, especially about stuff I care about.
I do bizness over facebook. Contributors find it refreshing. They like seeing their name in the ToC on the antho page or their own page (for the chapbooks), they share them with friends, put them on their Linked-In profiles, tweet them, etc.
Ok...I'll grant that the status quo says no.
But we're living in the goddamn future! Nobody cares that I have hand-written rejection slips from Ed Ferman and George Scithers and Gardner Dozois and CC Finlay except me. That was so yesterday. Utilize the possibilities of the media...bother everyone! Heh.
/rantlet


----------



## Cephus (Mar 16, 2019)

MichelD said:


> I don't even know what "That's bad hat Harry"  means.
> 
> Yes  I emailed her with no reply so I took other steps.
> 
> ...



They get thousands of unsolicited manuscripts these days.  If they don't tell you yes, it's a no.  Just because you can find a person doesn't mean you have a right to.  It sounds like it was her personal Facebook account, not a business account.  You were simply in the wrong.


----------



## JJBuchholz (Mar 16, 2019)

Going after an editor's Facebook......ouch. That is a BIG way to get permanently black listed. I have sent work to about 40-50 publishers over the last year and a half. Some have responded with a no (or rather rude no), and some (aside from the one that did publish my work) didn't respond at all.

There is no point trying to go after a publisher. If they want your work, they will tell you. If they don't get back to you at all, it's most likely a no. I remember getting extremely angry at one of the rejection emails, but I did not go after them to explain why or vent my anger at their rude response. I can be confrontational at times, but the better part of valour is to walk away and move on.

Repeatedly sending replies via email and looking up someone from the publisher on Facebook is creepy. Great way to invite the police to your door.

-JJB


----------



## bazz cargo (Mar 16, 2019)

Hi Micheld, I'm very pleased to meet you.

I presume you have a copy of The Writers' & Artists' Yearbook. Some agents and publishers do have contacts through FB, Just check to see if it is business and not private. 

Good advice in the book Dude, worth a read.


----------



## eggo (Mar 16, 2019)

A face book account posted publicly is public. If you don’t want people seeing it or responding, make it so that can’t happen. If someone spams you, tough.

Yes, they run a dying industry. Who buys books anymore? The digital format is where it’s at. I would think about a digital strategy.

The stiff pomposity some editors rule with makes them deserve to get their noses tweeked.

It’s like sending your child off to school and having the bus forget to pick them up. If it irritated her, good. You’re a person and deserve to be treated as such. The same lop-sided reasoning allows her to be untouched on FB, but has no compulsion or obligation to send a rejection.

I burned a few bridges with editors and I’m a better person, I feel better for it.

You think these idiots will remember when you submit next time?

Prol not.

Either way, don’t sweat it. It means nothing.


----------



## luckyscars (Mar 16, 2019)

eggo said:


> A face book account posted publicly is public. If you don’t want people seeing it or responding, make it so that can’t happen. If someone spams you, tough.



By this rationale, anybody who ever leaves their house and walks down a street can be endlessly panhandled/cat-called/hustled/whatever with no moral culpability on the part of the antagonist because it's a 'public place', and your solution would be for them to stay indoors. 

US and European courts have ruled pretty consistently that an expectation of privacy exists on social media and targeted online harassment, even if it isn't intended as such, is a thing.



> Yes, they run a dying industry. Who buys books anymore? The digital format is where it’s at. I would think about a digital strategy.



Probably true. Definitely irrelevant. Either way, going from 'they should communicate more with people online' to 'that gives me, the writer, the right to spam them as much as I like' makes no sense.

Also... plenty of people buy books. Independent bookshops particularly are actually increasing. https://www.bookweb.org/for-the-record They just don't necessarily buy them in the same way or from the same places.



> The stiff pomposity some editors rule with makes them deserve to get their noses tweeked.
> 
> It’s like sending your child off to school and having the bus forget to pick them up. If it irritated her, good. You’re a person and deserve to be treated as such. The same lop-sided reasoning allows her to be untouched on FB, but has no compulsion or obligation to send a rejection.
> 
> I burned a few bridges with editors and I’m a better person, I feel better for it.



Associating basic human rights, never mind using an taxpayer-funded school bus failing its duty of care toward a child as analogous with some writer's imagined entitlement over whether they deserve an email, is pretty breathtaking stuff. I don't think you are being serious. But if you are, holy Batman...

Yes it's lop sided. A writer is a seller in a buyer's market. If any given agent's responsiveness doesn't line up with your expectations then okay, don't do business with them, but it's foolish and I'd be genuinely interested to know such an attitude has worked in your favor. Either way I don’t see what any of that’s got to do with 'not being treated as a person' for anybody with an emotional intelligence over the age of six.

By the same logic that 'every submission deserves a rejection' then every single phone call or email from a telemarketer, survey-taker, religious recruiter or any other stranger crying for attention that you have ever ignored, rejected or otherwise not bothered engaging with wholeheartedly on the basis that 'I don't have time for that shit right now' and then promptly forgotten, is an example of _your_ pomposity. Imagine if the telemarketing rep you ignored fixated on that, proceeded to look you up and message you through your personal Facebook account to 'remind you' to respond? Imagine if they then decided to frame _you_ as the asshole on a Telemarketing Forum for telling them 'leave me alone'? Courtesy is _not_ a human right and believing it is is, to my mind, the essence of privilege. People are going to be rude. Doesn't mean they 'deserve' anything.



> You think these idiots will remember when you submit next time?
> 
> Prol not.



My cousin worked as a receptionist for an acting agency in the late nineties. He said they kept a box-file in the office with a label that said 'basket case' where they put envelope files of correspondence from anybody talentless, insane, bothersome or often-times all three and whenever they got an email (or, in those days, usually a phone call or a fax) they would check the Basket Case before engaging. 

I'm not saying that's true for all of 'these idiots', but I wouldn't push it. In the days of email submissions and automatic archiving it's still easy to search a name in any outlook email account and see any prior submissions and communications. 'Prol not' probably isn't the way to go.


----------



## eggo (Mar 16, 2019)

> By this rationale, anybody who ever leaves their house and enters a 'public' space can be endlessly panhandled/cat-called/whatever all the way down the street with no moral culpability on the part of the antagonist, because it's a 'public place'. US and European courts have ruled pretty consistently that an expectation of privacy exists on social media and targeted online harassment is a thing. But I'm sure you're smarter




Why yes, I am smarter. Let me know when the courts remove the panhandlers at the intersection in town here. Perhaps I could tell them that what they are doing is illegal and morally inculpable.





> Probably true. Definitely irrelevant. Either way, going from 'they should communicate more with people online' to 'that gives me, the writer, the right to spam them however I like' is so nonsensical it doesn't warrant much debate.




I’m glad you agree. 


The difference between your arguments and lamented protestations for the poor editors is they ask for submissions. They ask for these, get it? 


Yes, for them to literally take 10 seconds to write an email or stuff a photocopied rejection in a envelope you supplied is too much to expect and they should be beyond reproach. Let me be the first say, All Hail the Editor Overlords!


The reality is easy, if someone treats me like crap I never submit to them again.


----------



## luckyscars (Mar 17, 2019)

eggo said:


> The difference between your arguments and lamented protestations for the poor editors is they ask for submissions. They ask for these, get it?



Oh yeah I get it. Question is...do you?

Yes, they asked for the submission initially. They also stated the terms by which follow-up on the submission is to be conducted. At no time was the OP promised a response to the said follow up. It's really that simple. The fact the editor initially asked for something is totally irrelevant because what the editor _asked for_ they received and what the OP was owed in _return_ was...nothing. Not a biscuit. Both parties' obligations ended the moment the editor received the copy. Can't accept that kind of brutality? Don't submit work to editors.

I could almost sympathize with this except that email the OP says even included a direction stating a version of 'don't call us we'll call you' and that two months of silence meant 'no thanks'.  Further attention, ten seconds or not, was not promised, yet he chose to force it anyway. Textbook delusion.



> Yes, for them to literally take 10 seconds to write an email or stuff a photocopied rejection in a envelope you supplied is too much to expect and they should be beyond reproach. Let me be the first say, All Hail the Editor Overlords!
> 
> 
> The reality is easy, if someone treats me like crap I never submit to them again.



At no point did I say this editor, nor any, are beyond reproach. 

As I said before, I am not defending this woman. Yeah, she probably _should_ _have_ responded to the OP. That would have been considerate. She probably _should_ _have_ done a lot of things in her life, including marrying me, not dying her hair red in college, publishing the OP's novel, and handing all of us a million bucks. What she _should have _done, however, is not remotely relevant to what the OP _should not have_ done, which is dabble in some online stalkery.

So I _am_ defending a bit of common sense and the red pill of reality. We all know this is how many editors do operate. I am sure at the very least _you_ know that. It's almost like you're not actually that interested in discussing the submissions process and just angry at the publishing industry.... 

...which is fine, hell, you may have very good reasons, but it's an emotional standpoint I have no interest in, nor one that seems conducive to the topic of handling rejection. Carry on.


----------



## Ralph Rotten (Mar 17, 2019)

See; this kind of crap from editors is exactly why I became an Indie.
I did the conventional track for years, sold articles to magazines, published a book...but the whole submission process took up a lotta writing time, and frequently pissed me off enough to interfere with my writing buzz.
I simply got tired of having to wait months and months on the whims of an editor. Or spend time trying to write the perfect query letter.
All the negativity made me not wanna write.


So I ditched it*. Now I'm working with a great bunch of Indies and working to not only sell my own books, but also to legitimize Indie writers.



*Before I became an Indie, I wrote a lot, prolly about 400,000 words worth of shorts, novels, and articles for gun magazines.
If you have not yet acquired the experience to go solo (roughly 200k words) then you should stay on the conventional track.
And if you stay on the conventional track, you should obey the rules of that road (assuming you wanna sell anything.)


----------



## moderan (Mar 17, 2019)

Isn't organizing indies sorta like the old MAD magazine cartoon about noncomformists, where they all wear jean jackets and carry signs, because it's their uniform? Heh. Just sayin.
I think it's laudable...and there are interesting arguments on both sides here. But I like busting the paradigm in my own way. Both sides of the OP had a lot of wrong happening. Probably the best thing is to move on, yes? Judge Wapner ain't here.

I felt the same way, Ralph, so I became an editor and now a publisher. On a budget of zero, so it's from the ground up all the time!


----------



## luckyscars (Mar 17, 2019)

Ralph Rotten said:


> See; this kind of crap from editors is exactly why I became an Indie.
> I did the conventional track for years, sold articles to magazines, published a book...but the whole submission process took up a lotta writing time, and frequently pissed me off enough to interfere with my writing buzz.
> I simply got tired of having to wait months and months on the whims of an editor. Or spend time trying to write the perfect query letter.
> All the negativity made me not wanna write.
> ...



I respect your opinion. 

Personally I see the conventional route as just being like any business relationship where there is an inherent imbalance of bargaining power. If occasionally kowtowing to the whims of editors rubs the wrong way I understand TOTALLY the decision to bypass the bull crap by going Indie. Especially given how it has taken off over the past few years. If you are the type who relishes the challenge of being an Indie there is no reason not to be an Indie.

Unfortunately a good many people, clearly, are too lazy or arrogant or both to take the Indie route, so they try to have it both ways. They pursue editors, then promptly refuse to adapt to what editors want, refusing to abide by the stated rules, then have the gall to complain about getting kicked to the curb like they're owed someone's time.  I'd put anybody who whines about editors not responding and thinks spamming/harassing them firmly in that category. 

It is no different to a guy who comes into work thirty minutes late, gets high on his lunch hour, does consistently poor work, generally ignores the rules whenever he disagrees with them, then still believes he deserves a promotion. Many of the rules editors set are not there to piss people off but rather to weed out those who take liberties or otherwise act unprofessionally.

I suppose this comes down to why some people choose to start their own businesses while other people choose to work for an existing one. The Indie writer is a self-employed businessman who enjoys making their own opportunities, having creative control, doing their own marketing, etc. That's great, but it doesn't mean editors and conventional publishing routes aren't relevant or useful. For one plenty of very good writers are not good business people. They're just not. In that case respecting 'this kind of crap' is the price you pay for other people to do the legwork. Seems fair.


----------



## Ralph Rotten (Mar 18, 2019)

For me, the negativity of the submission process was such a downer that it inhibited my writing...even when I was actively selling articles.
Sure, you'd sell one to Guns&Ammo, then the next 5 would either be rejections or no-replies (there was one editor in particular at Peterson publishing who NEVER replied to queries, even if you included SASE.)
Then once you start writing a lot, 50% of your time gets wrapped up in the overhead of chasing publishers.

Worse yet, if you look at the current average payouts for conventionally published books...it's not a whole lot better than what you can make as an Indie.




And Mod, that's not the first time I have been compared to something from MAD magazine.
At least you didn't say I looked like Alfred.


----------



## moderan (Mar 18, 2019)

More like Fester Bestertester 
Vote for Neuman! 
Rejection is so time-consuming. Try freelance journalism. Absolute madness!
I get high before work, during work, and after work. The boss insists.
My motto: Write on the drugs, edit on the sobers.


----------



## Moose.H (Nov 13, 2020)

Hokay, I am still playing for an acceptance. I believe rules are to be broken if only to set new limits (as long as you are polite and aren't creepy). But trying to define the etiquette in publishing is damn near impossible. What I do know is that their tastes change with what is currently popular (great when it takes many times longer to write your fiction book). Dragons are not so popular  at the moment yet so many authors plug on with manuscripts on Dragons. Yet if publishers want something new, your new concept isn't the new what they want...... 

You have to provide what they believe will sell now.

So far I have had only swift polite rejections  and a comment that the tale isn't quite what they are looking for.  I believe the expression is 'Good try still no coconut?" 

In fair terms it is only really an acceptance and a cheque that speak truly. 

So I am looking to find what the heck they want without being accused of stalking 20-30 editors. 




I can say that the idea of a struggling writer attracting women is the worst fiction.... a friend told me that....


----------



## -xXx- (Nov 13, 2020)

Moose.H said:


> Hokay, I am still playing for an acceptance. I believe rules are to be broken if only to set new limits (as long as you are polite and aren't creepy). But trying to define the etiquette in publishing is damn near impossible. What I do know is that their tastes change with what is currently popular (great when it takes many times longer to write your fiction book). Dragons are not so popular  at the moment yet so many authors plug on with manuscripts on Dragons. Yet if publishers want something new, your new concept isn't the new what they want......
> 
> You have to provide what they believe will sell now.
> 
> ...



how big is your current readership?
pls.n.thx,


----------



## Moose.H (Nov 14, 2020)

-xXx- said:


> how big is your current readership?
> pls.n.thx,


I think your answer is in my first sentence. :icon_cyclops_ani:
However my Economics book got me several offers to do a Dr even though it didn't sell a huge lot. In a sense it was a roaring success, in another sense a fiscal f@#$@#%up.

While I like the idea of skipping the bull with pay-to-print I believe that they often fail because they don't get to tweak the tale to twerk the interest of people who matter.


----------



## -xXx- (Nov 14, 2020)

Moose.H said:


> Hokay, I am still playing for an acceptance.


this sentence?



Moose.H said:


> I think your answer is in my first sentence. :icon_cyclops_ani:
> However my Economics book got me several offers to do a Dr even though it didn't sell a huge lot. In a sense it was a roaring success, in another sense a fiscal f@#$@#%up.
> 
> While I like the idea of skipping the bull with pay-to-print I believe that they often fail because they don't get to tweak the tale to twerk the interest of people who matter.



how big is that *econ* readership?


----------



## WailingDusk (Nov 15, 2020)

Submit it to a few more agents. If you get replies similar to this, you have a problem that you have to fix, and if you don't want to fix them, just move on. Since you got a detailed reply, you should probably go back and work on it. When you get a personalized response, it means the agent thought your manuscript was worth a response. I'd take his/her advice and work on it. I rewrote a book recently that I wrote 10 years ago. If you liked the story/topic, it's worth it. If not, trunk it.


----------



## ironpony (Nov 18, 2020)

Well that's too bad, but shop it around anywhere else, if you haven't yet?


----------



## Deleted member 64995 (Nov 18, 2020)

J.K. Rowling has been rejected, Harry Potter more than 10 times.
Remember, don't give up.


----------



## Kyle R (Nov 18, 2020)

I know the original post in this thread is quite old, but I want to point out that any personalized rejection is a good rejection, because (as others have pointed out) the agent/editor took the time to offer some constructive feedback.

By comparison, I spent the first two _years_ receiving nothing but form rejections. If my memory serves me correctly, I didn't receive a personal response until my third year of submitting.

Long story short: be grateful for any feedback you receive. There are some writers out there who, literally, might _never_ receive a personalized response. :grief:


----------

