Recently I posted on Facebook an email rejection I received for a work of nonfiction —
Thank you for sending us “[title withheld by me].” The editors had a lengthy discussion about your work. Unfortunately, we are not able to publish it in our forthcoming issue; however, we certainly encourage you to submit other work to us in the future, as your piece had its fans.
This is called a “scrawl” and writers will tell you that as rejections go, this is about the best you could ask for. It is much more encouraging than a form email, such as —
Thank you for the opportunity to read your work. We’re sorry to say that after careful consideration, we have decided not to publish this submission. We do wish you the best of luck placing it elsewhere, and with all your writing endeavors.
Still, it is a rejection, and it stung. It’s easy to take rejection personally when you pour so much of your life into the thing that’s being rejected. My friend Roberta Guthrie Kowald commented on my post —
The best advice I ever got was from the late Aussie poet John Hanrahan. John told me years ago that it is never the “best” work that wins the prizes, or gets published, or makes it past the editors. “Sweetheart,” he said “The winner is just the one they could all agree on.”
This is something I know, but need to be reminded of now and again. So thank you, Roberta, for sharing. I share it here with the hope that it may remind someone in need.
Finally, reading rejections the giants received sometimes puts things in perspective —
There certainly isn’t enough genuine talent for us to take notice.
Someone sent that to Sylvia Plath.
[cross posted on extracriticum.com]